How is it that SC assisting the Royal Commission,Gail Furness, is allowed to cross examine her SSM partner, Maree Walk? That’s right! Gail Furness is married to Maree Walk, Head of Out Of Home Care N.S.W, including Foster Care and Adoptions. Justice McLelland and his Intrepid Religous Zealots,have completely ignored our calls to have this “Conflict Of Interest” investigated. Complaints to the Royal Commission themselves have also been ignored. Maree Walk oversaw the William Tyrell disappearance in her role as head of out of home care and also the death of young Braxton, two cases that highlights her reign and the carnage left.If the Royal commission wont act, on what is clearly a “Conflict Of Interest” then that leaves us with no choice other than lodge a complaint with F.A.C.S N.S.W head honcho, Michael Coutts Trotter!

Whats this? Michael Coutts Trotter, husband to Tanya Plibersek, is not only the head of F.A.C.S, N.S.W but a convicted Herion trafficker! WTF is going on? We have the head of Out Of Home Care giving “Corrupt” evidence to the Royal Commission whilst being questioned by her WIFE, Gail Furness! Maree Walk’s boss is a convicted drug trafficker who is in charge of the very Dept that is under the spotlight for the disappearance of William Tyrell and the litany of Abuse and cover-up within the walls of F.A.C.S, N.S.W. The buck stops with this “Motley Crew” of miscreants! I have it on very good authority that a senior F.A.C.S member was convicted of multiple CSA charges and sentenced to home detention. That person then went missing on over 80 occasions, his ankle monitor alerting F.A.C.S workers who would simply go out, find him, then return him home without so much as lodging a report!I believe these allegation have been swept under the carpet by F.A.C.S and the Royal Commission. Imagine the Dinner Table conversation at the Furness/Walk household regarding Williem Tyrell and the Royal Commissions intent on covering it up!

Eric Hudson was appointed Head Counsellor for the Royal Commission and Confidante to Survivors experiencing trauma related to giving evidence at the Royal commission. Imagine the shock felt by one survivor who felt the full wrath of Eric Hudson’s anger and persistant bullying because she would’nt take down a poster she had put up at the Ballarat hearings! The following is Testimony given by Gabrielle Short to the Royal Commission via email, back in 2015, whereby Gabbi outlines a litany of Bully Boy Tactics implemented on herself by Eric Hudson.

Hi Julie.

Thanks for taking the time to listen to us, when we visited the Royal Commission on Thursday August 31st 2017.

As per your request, this is the footage of what occurred at a previous Royal Commission in Ballarat. I have saved copies of three videos onto a USB stick for you. And I have included another copy of the complaints I gave to you on the day we spoke.

As you will see, at no stage did I approach Eric nor did I abuse him in any way. On the morning of the day in question. I had learned that Eric had ordered us to take down the banners, but myself and some other Forgotten Australians had been up in the court room listening to the witness testimonies at the time. So, when we arrived back outside to where our banners were, we had found that the banners had been taken down. I was informed by Stephanie a fellow forgotten Australian who had stayed outside during this time that she was ordered by Eric to take them down, and said when she asked why that he told her that it was because people were offended by them.

Given that Eric has no Jurisdiction to make such a request, and secondly, given that these banners were in no way offensive, I took it upon myself to put them all back where they were. And, as I was leaning up to stick one of them back up, I heard a male voice behind me say “how are you going pulling down the banners ladies” to which I replied “we’re not, we’re putting them back up” And this voice was starting to get quite aggressive as he was not happy we refused to obey his order. I was told this was Eric at this stage, and then I saw him walk up the stairs and speak to security, at his request they then came down to enquire about the banners, they inspected the banners and then said that we were in fact not doing anything illegal and that the banners were not breaching anything so they are okay for them to stay where they are. Eric was not happy with this so he then went to the Federal Police, and this also resulted with same outcome.

When Eric realised that his plea’s to both security and federal police failed. He then approached me again, and requested that I pull them down. At this stage, Stephanie had the video camera and began to film the conversation. It’s very hard to hear the audio, due to a lot of background noise. But if you listen to the whole video you will pick up parts of the conversation. You will also see that I not once was rude to Eric. He approached me, Eric and Luke were hell bent on us pulling down those banners. At one stage when I said to them that security did not have a problem, Luke actually replied with “I don’t believe you”. It made me feel quite disrespected and intimidated, I feel this was borderline harassment and it made me feel like as far as they are concerned we are irrelevant, possibly because we did not come under the Clan banner, and we are not connected to any registered organisation. It seemed they were trying desperately to convince us that we were doing the wrong thing. Myself, Eric and Luke did not realise that Stephanie was recording this transaction, until Stephanie made a noise from behind and as you will see Eric then turns around.

Eric and Luke pretty well spent the whole morning on trying to get our banners taken down. One would think that they would have more pressing matters to attend too and not being paid to harass victims of abuse for expressing themselves in a reasonable manner.

You will also see in the video that there was an incident between Stephanie and Eric, which had nothing to do with me. In fact when Eric asked Stephanie to stop filming him, I supported him on that. He then walks away from Stephanie and approaches me and introduces himself then proceeds to question my right of freedom to express myself in a legal way as explained above.

So, I would really like to know, under who’s authority were Eric and Luke questioning me under and what law was I breaking?

I have previously submitted details of my horrible experience during the Royal Commission of August 2015 where I was not given any support from the Royal Commission.

Fast forward February 2017

While I was down in Sydney attending the Catholic Church final hearing. Eric and I crossed paths again, as there was an incident with another survivor who had travelled all the way from Melbourne, and when he arrived he told us that he was going to commit suicide out the front of the RC. I will not go into too much detail here, but we did approach Eric about it, we went into a room, and while in that room Eric was virtually saying that he couldn’t really help.

So we sought help from Francis Sullivan who also couldn’t provide any help either except to say that he could provide a list of agencies that the survivor could contact and ask for help. We were not very happy with this result. Although eventually we did manage to get help for this victim from another source who ended up paying for his accommodation and also paid for his flight back to Melbourne.

So whilst in the room with Eric we had got into conversation and a friend who was with me spoke up about an incident she had, had with Eric, and that was when I also mentioned about Ballarat, Eric started to raise his voice and stated “oh you and Stephanie treated me appallingly down at the RC in Ballarat” I was shocked at his statement, because I knew this was not true. I then responded to Eric and said if anything it was you who treated myself appallingly due to intimidation tactics you were using to get me to pull the banners down, you were the one who approached me”

I then had to tell Eric that the conversation outside of the RC in Ballarat was recorded. He then got very angry and threw his glasses on the table (There are witnesses to this). After we left the room I was a bit shaken up, and then it suddenly dawned on me that what Eric had said in the room about me treating him appallingly down at the RC Ballarat, could very possibly be the reason why I was refused support when I was giving my public testimony at the Youth Training Centre’s hearing for the Royal Commission in Melbourne August 2015. I feel that he has rubbed my name in the dirt to his colleagues, who he may not of necessarily instructed not to support me, but may have not done so due to what they had heard from their boss Eric.

I would also advise Eric Hudson, Head Counsellor, Royal commission, to take down this picture he has on his facebook account. I wont show the full picture as it can constitute Child Pornography! The link to see complete picture is, https://www.pablopicasso.org/boy-leading-a-horse.jsp. Disgusted to think that the very person who’s job it is to counsel CSA survivors feels its ok to have this on his account!

THIS (18 mBYTE DOWNLOAD), LINKED ABOVE, IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT RELEASED IN AUGUST BY THE 2012 QUEENSLAND CHILD PROTECTION COMMISSION OF INQUIRY SO YOU MAY VIEW IT AND COMMENT ON ITS FINDINGS WITHOUT ANY FEARS OF BEING SUED FOR DEFAMATION. REMEMBER TO USE THE PASSWORD

A decorated military commander, hailed as one of Britain’s greatest, has been accused of molesting children while serving as the Queen’s representative in Australia.

Field Marshal William Slim, 1st Viscount Slim, has been accused of abusing the youngsters who attended a school for underprivileged children.

Victims in Australia have come forward, claiming they were abused by the First and Second World War veteran, who died in 1970 at the age of 79.

Accused: Field Marshal Viscount William Slim has been accused of molesting children at Fairbridge Farm School in south western Australia, while he served as Governor-General to the country. He is pictured (right) inspecting the troops during the Burma Campaign during the Second World War

School: The majority of pupils at Fairbridge Farm School, of which Viscount Slim was a patron, were British migrants.

Victims: The allegations against Viscount Slim (left with his wife Lady Slim and right) as 65 alleged victims of abuse filed a lawsuit against Fairbridge Farm School

Taint sticks to Bryce!

Taint sticks to Bryce

Article By Piers Akerman

The Sunday telegraph 26 April 2008

Documents lodged with the Queensland Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee on February 14, two months before Ms Bryce was nominated as Australia’s next Governor-General by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, have created a Constitutional nightmare for the Queensland Government and the Prime Minister.

The papers are contained in the nine-volume Rofe Audit, by leading Sydney barrister David Rofe, QC, into the long-running and unresolved Heiner Affair involving approval by the Goss Cabinet in 1990 of the illegal shredding of documents relating to investigations into allegations of child abuse at a Brisbane detention centre.

Ominously for Ms Bryce, the PCMC has already conducted what it terms a “preliminary examination’’ and has sought further advice on aspects of the material which contains a list of 68 alleged prima facie criminal charges and specific evidence and arguments in support of those allegations.

In response to that request, lawyers representing Mr Kevin Lindeberg, a former public servant who sought the involvement of the PCMC, last week told the committee that “recent events’’ had made the need for action “more urgent’’.

They reminded the committee that since their complaint was lodged in February, Mr Rudd had announced his appointment of Ms Bryce as Governor-General designate to take up her duty on or about September 5, 2008.

“The PCMC would be well aware that Mr Rudd is named in (alleged) prima facie criminal charges 1 and 2 of Volume 1, and the Hon. Quentin Bryce AC in the (alleged) prima facie criminal charge 67 of Volume IX of the Audit respectively,’’ the lawyers wrote.

The letter also notes a recent judicial appointment in Queensland and says that with that appointment, the PCMC now held evidence alleging prima facie criminality in respect of six serving Queensland judicial officers, Justice Catherine Holmes, Justice Tim Carmody, Judge Julie Dick, Her Honour Leanne Clare, His Honour Noel Nunan and State Magistrate Michael Barnes.

Ms Bryce sought a report on the Heiner Affair from then Premier Peter Beattie on October 23, 2003.
Premier Beattie presented the report to her in April, 2005, almost two years later, but did not make the document public, in stark contrast to the manner in which he handled the Anglican Church’s report into abuse which he tabled in the Queensland Parliament before the resignation of former Governor General Peter Hollingworth in May, 2003, as a matter of “public interest’’.

Rev Hollingworth, a former Archbishop of Brisbane was the subject of a relentless campaign during which he faced allegations that he had participated in a church cover-up and failed to act against church officers engaged in sexual abuse.

A fortnight before Mr Hollingworth’s resignation, then Labor Opposition Shadow spokesperson for Children and Youth and the Status of Women, Ms Nicola Roxon, told Federal Parliament on May 13 that: “… We cannot afford to brush it aside, keep it behind closed doors or say it is someone else’s issue. We need to be prepared to take a leadership role here. It might be awkward for the government. We need to take some action so this terrible issue is dealt with. The community thinks that leaders in this country are covering up what has happened in the past. Whether they think it is church leaders, politicians or other powerful people, we must make sure that we are never part of that conspiracy. We on this side of the House and, I am sure, the people on the other side of the House do not want to cover up this issue …’’

The following day, Victorian Labor Senator Stephen Conroy continued the attack, telling the Senate that: “Victims, parents and the community do not want any more cover-ups. They want their stories told, they want perpetrators brought to justice and they want further generations of children to be protected from such suffering.’’

He was followed by South Australian Labor Senator Nick Bolkus, who said “In our performance, in our response, we also will be judged on whether and how we respond to this important challenge. If we as a national parliament do not take the right and proper moral stand on issues relating to paedophilia that affect our children, then we too could be condemned – and I think quite fairly so – by the public of Australia for turning a blind eye to paedophilia, its victims and those who tolerate it.’’

On May 26, three days before the Mr Hollingworth resigned, the then Opposition leader, Simon Crean, told the House “you cannot have people in authority who have covered up for child sex abuse. It is as simple as that’’, and “Isn’t a person of authority who failed to act on issues of child sexual abuse guilty of moral turpitude? Of course he is. This is a person in authority. This was a person to whom the allegations were made, and he failed to act.’’

The key to the allegations made against Ms Bryce and several other senior Queensland politicians and judicial officers echoes the point made by Mr Crean: they were made aware of allegations and failed to act.

Under the Queensland Crime and Misconduct Act 2001 and the repealed Criminal Justice Act, government authorities must act if they receive allegations of “suspected’’ official misconduct. Failure to do so falls into the category of “abuse of office in commission’’.

The Rofe Audit makes it clear there is evidence that goes well beyond this low threshold.

The PCMC review follows the release last August of the so-called Judges’ letter which stated that “any action by Executive Government which may have breached the law ought not be immune from criminal prosecution where and when the evidence satisfies the relevant provision’’.

It would seem that the best possible course for Mr Rudd and Ms Bryce is to insist on all matters being investigated and resolved before the Governor General designate takes up her new post.

Until then she should decline to be sworn in to prevent a significant taint being attached to the highest public office in the land. For that matter, Ms Bryce should stand aside in Queensland until a proper investigation clears removes forever this taint from the Queensland government and the office of Governor in that State.

Heiner affair shadows Bryce

Piers Akerman

Saturday, August 09, 2008 at 07:03pm

SERIOUS allegations concerning the integrity of Governor-General designate Quentin Bryce and her role in the unresolved Heiner affair are being investigated by staff of Governor-General Major-General Michael Jeffery.

The investigation threatens plans to swear in Ms Bryce as the nation’s 25th Governor-General, and the first woman to occupy the post, on September 5.

The allegations about Ms Bryce’s fitness to hold the position as the Queen’s representative were sent to Buckingham Palace, with a copy to Major-General Jeffery, on May 30 by Kevin Lindeberg, the whistle blower in the long-running Heiner affair.

On June 10, the deputy official secretary to the Governor-General, Brian Hallett, wrote to Mr Lindeberg, assuring him that “the issues raised in your letter are being investigated’’.

One of Australia’s most senior judicial figures, with a record of service at a vice-regal level, says that he has examined much of the Heiner affair material and “there is certainly a case to answer’’.

The Heiner affair concerns the illegal shredding by the Goss Cabinet of documents relating to investigations into child abuse at a Brisbane detention centre that were wanted for evidence, and the cover-up of that action.

In his letter to Buckingham Palace, Mr Lindeberg mentioned the audit prepared by Sydney QC David Rofe, and The Sunday Telegraph and The Daily Telegraph’s coverage of the Heiner affair.

The audit details 68 unresolved alleged prima facie criminal charges which Rofe QC believes are capable of being brought against current and former public officials in respect of their handling of the Heiner matter.

Mr Lindeberg referred to reports in this column that Prime Minister Rudd and former Governor of Queensland Ms Bryce were among the officials associated with alleged prima facie charges by the audit.

He told the Queen that documents including the Rofe audit, an application for review and the statement of concern sent by a number of legal figures to then Queensland Premier Beattie and current Premier Anna Bligh, were lodged with the Queensland Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee, in an application for a review under the Queensland Crime and Misconduct Act. The PCMC is investigating the matter.

Ms Bryce sought a report on the Heiner affair from Premier Beattie in 2003, received it, but neither she nor Mr Beattie ever made it public.

Mr Lindeberg said in his letter that the Australian Constitution vested reserve powers in the Governor-General, including the right to dismiss a prime minister or minister who acts unlawfully.

He said those holding the office of Governor-General must do so without any suspicion that their integrity might be in doubt as sufficing to impinge on their capacity to exercise those reserve powers impartially.

The exercise of those reserve powers may be brought into jeopardy after September 5, he claimed, unless the Heiner affair is properly resolved.

A spokesman for the Governor-General would not tell The Sunday Telegraph how the investigation into the Heiner affair was being conducted.

The treatment of Ms Bryce is in stark contrast to the very public populist witch hunt launched after it was alleged former Governor-General Peter Hollingworth had failed to act and had participated in a cover-up when allegations of sexual abuse were made against church officers while he was Anglican Archbishop of Brisbane.

Then Premier Beattie made public a private Anglican Church report into abuse by tabling it in the Queensland Parliament before Mr Hollingworth resigned as Governor-General.

The then Opposition leader Simon Crean had made the point that you cannot have people in authority who have covered up for child sex abuse and failed to act.

The allegations of prima facie criminal conduct made against Ms Bryce and several other senior Queensland politicians and judicial officers echo the point made by Mr Crean: they were made aware of allegations and failed to act.

The Governor-General’s office must now demonstrate that it is conducting a thorough examination of the matters raised by Mr Lindeberg but it is impossible to see how it can come to any conclusion before Ms Bryce is due to take up her new appointment.

built by the catholic church in emu park queensland called “The Haven”.Francis Forde went on to become australia’s

high commissioner in ottowa canada.Mr forde’s son is Dr Francis Gerard Ford child psychologist and i note was involved the ottowa sex abuse scandal and also “The Cornwall” sex abuse scandal.Coincidence? I think not.

Francis Forde jnr was a Theoligian Ethicist who sat in on Cornwall Inquiry. Francis Forde jnr is also the first husband of Leneen Forde,(forde inquiry,rockhampton,queensland)

How in hell did Leneen Forde get to chair a sex abuse inquiry into queensland orphanages when her husband was Albert Mcdonald was subpoened to appear before the woods royal commission on pedophile and drug allegations.Also note that Leneen Forde‘s father in law, FrancisForde, was the local member for Rockhampton and frequently visited Neerkol and

other orphanages in surrounding area.FrancisForde was made High Commissioner to Canada in the late 40’s and during the course of that tenure the town of cornwall was riddled with

the fact that nearly every boy in the town had been molested by clergy and government officials (ref: The Cornwall Inquiry ).During the investigations in cornwall inquiry, FrancisForde jnr

was allowed to question victims as his role of seminarian child psychologist.The Badgley report into the cover up of the sex abuse scandal in Ottowa has a Natalie Forde sitting in on

proceedings also.In the canadian state library there are graphic photo’s of FrancisForde snr that were archived by former canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney.These photo’s were

taken Australia Day 1950 celebrations in ottowa canada.Mr Mulroney would have been around ten years old when photo’s were taken.There are far too many questions that have not been

asked concerning the Forde family’s involvement in sex abuse scandals throughout the commonwealth.All of this information is available on the net and can be easily followed.Ironically

the Forde foundation in queensland are now a charitable organisation dealing with Stanwell electricity company in all matter’s involving Neerkol and Forgotten Australians issues.We see

it for what it is “Damage Control” on there part.Explosive allegations “yes” but as i say follow the links and there can be no other conclusion.

Kevin Lindeberg’s Reply:

Dear Wayne

There is not much that I can add to matters that you raise.

I will not speculate in this forum about how or why Leneen Forde was selected to chair the 1998/99 Inquiry by the Beattie Government. The Audit addresses her conduct when conducting the Inquiry, along with others. It is difficult to suggest or believe that she actively sought out the chairmanship because of ulterior personal reasons whose roots, as you seem to allege, go back many decades.

The fact is that she chaired the Inquiry.

As to matters that are alleged to have occurred in Canada, or indeed at Neerakol many years ago, I cannot add anything.

I have always dealt with “hard facts”, and never speculation.

As to where this all leads, only the future can tell or what a fair dinkum commission of inquiry may unearth. All the ingredient are present in the Heiner Affair which lends itself to “deeper waters” concerning the welfare of vulnerable children in the care of others including the State, but I do not go beyond what is in the Audit at this point of time – and that’s serious enough might I suggest.

Prince Andrew named in US lawsuit over underage sex claims http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/02/prince-andrew-named-us-lawsuit-underage-sex-allegations
The Prince and the paedophile: How Andrew enjoyed sensual massages at sex offender friend’s Florida mansion… and Duke invited him into the heart of the Royal Family
Jeffrey Epstein found many of his friends melted away when he was jailed
But conviction for abusing underage girls did not dent bond with Andrew
Three years after Epstein’s downfall, the friends were pictured together
Caused embarrassment and cost Prince Andrew job as British trade envoy
Claims that Duke holidayed at mansion where Epstein abused teenagers
In return, Epstein seemed to enjoy access to heart of the Royal Family

It’s ringleaders are so dangerous that speaking out about the abuse can lead to murder.

The following high-profile names were all killed because they had knowledge of the child-raping ways of the BBC:

Jill Dando

Kristian Digby

Natasha Collins

Mark Speight

Kevin Greening

Paula Yates

Rik Mayall

Peaches Geldof

Don’t be fooled into thinking that Jimmy Savile was a lone pervert stalking the broadcast centre.

He wasn’t.

Savile was, in fact, working as a VIP pimp, procuring children to be abused and often murdered, by Royalty, Government and showbiz entertainers.

He managed to hoodwink the British public for over 50 years due to his close links to Prince Philip, the Secret Services and Margaret Thatcher, who were themselves up to their necks in filth of the highest order.”

” Without a shadow of a doubt, these high-profile presenters met their end because they had knowledge of the sordid child-raping activities taking place at the BBC.

In a strange twist, BBC children’s presenter Mark Speight was implicated in the death of his girlfriend Natasha Collins in 2008.

He subsequently disappeared and was found hanging in a disused section of Paddington Station.

We now know Rolf Harris has been arrested by officers from Operation Yewtree., investigating a paedophile ring at the BBC.

It transpires that Mark Speight had done a lot of work with Rolf Harris.

At Mark’s memorial, Rolf made an emotional and tearful address:

‘It was joyful to work with Mark.

‘I realise now that I never told him how much I appreciated his programmes.

‘You realise you should always tell people what you think, you should tell them you love them because it might suddenly be too late.’

Rolf sang Sun Arise, backed by a band complete with didgeridoos.

He also did his version of Led Zeppelin’s Stairway to Heaven.”

We know Mark Speight did volunteer work for Childline and was one of their spokesmen and a high-profile campaigner.

Some say Childline is a “front” organisation used to filter out callers who may have been abused by VIP’s.

The coroner who held the inquiry into the deaths of Mark Speight and Natahsa Collins was Paul Knapman.

Knapman was responsible for many high-profile inquests during his 30-year tenure including the following:

He sought to highlight the shocking treatment of families of victims of the Marchioness boat tragedy by the creepy coroner.

For some unexplained reason, Knapman horrifically allowed the victims hands to be cut off and their body parts and tissues to be removed without permission and treated concerned family members with utter contempt.”

Knapman was up to his old tricks again when he claimed that BBC DJ, Kevin Greening, had killed himself in a gay bondage session that went wrong.

The murder of Jill Dando has remained conveniently ‘unsolved ‘ for the past 16 years.

Since 1998, we’ve heard various theories about possible motives for the murder including the involvement of the Serbian mafia or a revenge attack for her work on Crimewatch.

Were these theories merely red herrings, planted to throw investigators off track?

Most certainly, yes.

You see the brutal murder of Jill Dando was not carried out by a lone-stalker or Serbian warlord.

She was murdered by the British Establishment with help from sly Israeli intel agency, because she was about to expose the ring.

Jill’s close friend and confidante, Cliff Richard, has himself been named as a visitor to the notorious boy-brothel Elm Guest House, where vulnerable children were trafficked from local care homes to be abused by filthy VIPs.

Cliff was interviewed at length by detectives investigating the murder of Jill on several occasions.

Why was he such an important ‘ witness’ ?

Jill’s fiance, Alan Farthing, came face-to-face with Jill’s killer but conveniently forgot to tell the police.

Alan has since risen through the ranks of the medical profession and is now the doctor responsible for the birth of Kate and William’s new baby.

by Chris Griffith
Published 28 April 1996 in The Sunday Mail In a 1986 interview, Angus McDonald, a respected NSW police superintendent and husband of Governor Leneen Forde, made a pledge to catch those responsible for the near-fatal shooting of NSW drug squad detective Michael Drury.
In an interview with internal investigator Chief Supt Eric Strong, the then Supt McDonald said: “I will try until the day I am dead to find out who shot him and I hope that was the attitude of a lot of other members of the Police Force”.

Twelve years on, the callous shooting of Drury in 1984 is still listed as an unresolved crime.

But while the investigation languishes, the event has not been forgotten, thanks to the NSW Police Royal Commission which last month heard evidence that the original investigation of the Drury shooting was “an absolute cover-up” of the activities of disgraced NSW detective Roger Rogerson.

At the time Mr McDonald was a tough, respected, and successful homicide cop who had risen to become chief of operations at the NSW Criminal Investigation Branch.

When Drury was shot, McDonald appointed Det Sgt Dennis West to head the attempted murder investigation.

After consultation with Police Commissioner Cec Abbott and Assistant Commissioner Day, McDonald himself took charge of a second, parallel investigation into bribery allegations that pointed to Rogerson’s involvement in the Drury shooting.

Last month, a senior NSW Police internal affairs officer told the Royal Commission the initial investigation into Drury’s shooting was “an absolute cover-up.”

The witness, Det Insp William Smith, was one of eight police officers who in 1987 was assigned to Task Force Omega, the second of the three re-investigations of the Drury shooting.

On June 6th, 1984, Drury was shot in the abdomen and shoulder with two .357 hollow-point bullets through the window of his Chatsworth home in Sydney. He was critically ill for a month.

Mr McDonald recommended no departmental or criminal charges against Rogerson.

Last month Smith told the commission: “As I and other investigators on Omega were doing this, it became blatantly obvious that the initial investigation was an absolute cover-up in relation to Roger Rogerson.

“It became blatantly clear as each stage progressed that Rogerson was the linchpin and organiser of the shooting of Detective Drury.”

He said the investigation had not followed up key intelligence reports, including the intelligence report that “years later” led to Melbourne heroine dealer Alan David Williams confessing his and Rogerson’s part in a conspiracy to murder Drury.

“A solicitor … volunteered information in 1984, shortly after Drury was shot, to Victorian authorities that he had been privy to conversations in which the conspiracy was discussed and a fee of $50,000 to shoot Drury with a further $50,000 on the result that he was dead; that had never been followed up.”

According to the Task Force Omega report, Williams later confessed that Rogerson had received $45,000 and hitman Christopher Dale Flannery $5,000 before the shooting. The second $50,000, which was to be split the opposite way, was not paid because Drury survived.

At the time, Drury was about to give key evidence against Williams who was facing heroin trafficking charges in Melbourne. Williams, and his associates Hansen and Richardson were arrested following Drury’s involvement in a police undercover operation.

A 1984 investigation report by McDonald said that while Drury was critically ill, he told McDonald, in a bedside statement, that Rogerson had offered him (Drury) between $15,000 to $25,000 “if the right thing was done”.

The Omega Task Force report said McDonald himself faced two investigations.

After consideration by the Director of Prosecutions, no action was taken against him.

The report also recommended no charges be laid and highlighted the difficulty in deciding who was in charge , overall, of the investigation.

Further, a 1990 judicial review by Sydney Queens Counsel Howard Purnell dismissed a claim that Mr McDonald had failed to thoroughly investigate Williams’ role in the shooting.

“Williams was a hardened criminal and at that stage he apparently was not about to confess to New South Wales police,” Purnell wrote.

Nevertheless the emergence of the Omega Report issue at the NSW Royal Commission suggests Drury’s shooting and Mr McDonald’s investigation could be under scrutiny once more.

Mr McDonald has already appeared before the NSW Royal Commission, at a hearing in Lismore in March last year.

He answered questions on two unconnected internal affairs investigations and associated matters that occurred when he was superintendent of the Lismore region.

Last week, the commission said it would “neither confirm or deny” whether Smith’s evidence indicated Mr McDonald would take the stand soon to discuss the Drury shooting.

A Government House spokesman said Mr McDonald would be making “no comment” on any NSW Police Royal Commission matters.

Last week, The Sunday Mail obtained a copy of the 1984 Omega Task Force report.

It deals with a number of concerns about McDonald’s investigation, many of which he has responded to in other inquiries.

It said Mr McDonald had directed other investigators not to interview Rogerson.

Mr McDonald denied this in his 1986 interview with Chief Supt Strong.

It said there was evidence he prevented other members of the investigating team from seeing a “dying deposition” by Drury, where he implicated Rogerson in a bedside statement six days after the shooting. Again, Mr McDonald has denied this.

The report said: “Rogerson was discounted as a suspect by McDonald, who directed his questions solely to the bribe offer and nothing to the shooting.”

Mr McDonald said: “I completely disregarded my previous association and or friendship with Rogerson … those feelings on my previous association had no bearing on the manner in which I went about my task.”

In his report, Purnell found no “satisfactory evidence” of a conspiracy between Rogerson and Mr McDonald.

Juries acquitted Rogerson of attempting to bribe Drury in 1985, and in 1989 of conspiring to murder him.

However in 1990 Rogerson was convicted of conspiracy to defeat justice.

He was released after a successful appeal, but later was convicted of opening bank accounts under a false name. NSW police have confirmed he is now out of jail.

In his report, Purnell attempted to rationalise why Rogerson was not convicted in the original two trials.

He said the attempted bribery charge was thwarted when two associates of Drury, Detectives Roussos and Smith, changed their evidence.

And because Rogerson was found “not guilty” of the attempted bribery charge, Drury’s evidence of attempted bribery was disallowed at the conspiracy to murder trial.

The second trial therefore came down to the credibility of Williams against the credibility of Rogerson.

As the Governor’s husband, Mr McDonald performs some role jointly with Mrs Forde. In 1993 Governor-General Bill Hayden made Mr McDonald a Commander Brother of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem at a ceremony at Government House.A religeous order that features heavily in the CSA scandal that rocked Canada,The Cornwall Inquiry.The Canadian Child Abuse Scandal
The Unpurged Evil
in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall
A “pedophile clan” involving Catholic clergy: a cover-up
And a Breach of Trust: Breach of Faith,
which refuses to move From Pain to Hope
Allegations of Clerical Debauchery

As the allegations of sexual molestation, legal misdemeanours, and cover-up proliferated, a married middle-aged man now residing in the United States was determining to wipe his own slate clean. He had been involved with “the clan” himself, first as a young boy and later as an adult. According to the Ottawa Sun, “Richard” stepped into the fray because “This thing has been eating me alive inside-out. I think about it every single day.” He was even willing to incriminate himself, recognizing only too well that in the process, the police “are probably going to put the screws to me.” But he wanted to clean the slate.

So, in November 1996 Richard signed an affidavit. The information and allegations contained therein are extremely damning for a number of highly-respected individuals and, if verified, leave no doubt that a ring of molesters has been operating in Cornwall for a number of years. According to Richard, a number of Cornwall men are part of a “clan” of pedophiles. He names them. And, it’s a shocker. The names include those of several prominent men and a number of Roman Catholic clergy. A few of the suspects are now deceased, others are functioning in various capacities in their environs.

Richard alleges that he attended clan parties and witnessed “sexual improprieties, molestation, fondling, oral sex, intercourse (anal) between the above-named ‘clan’ members and minors through the period of 1957 or 1958 to 1993.” He numerically names some of those who attended the parties, concluding with #34: “Male prostitutes both adults and juveniles, altar boys and several others.” He recalls one party which included “a ceremonious ritual of candles in the Altar Boys rectums with sheets over them. These Altar Boys were walking around with the candle in the rectum and sheets over them with no clothes on, during this ceremony, several members of the clergy were fondling these boys and molesting them.” He continues, “all of the aforementioned priests committed illegal, inappropriate and perverse sexual acts against myself as a minor.” He also talks of a cache of pornographic pictures of young Cornwall boys taken with a Polaroid camera, and he recounts events leading up to Ken Seguin’s death.

Richard alleges that the clan had a number of meeting places, most of them in or around Cornwall. But an important point the clan also met in the United States. According to the affidavit, clan members travelled to Fort Lauderdale, Florida on a fairly regular basis where they would frequent an area called Birch Avenue and a certain motel which he names.

The information contained in this eight-page legal document, which names names and references a specific motel on the ‘pedophile strip’ in Fort Lauderdale, is now at the core of mounting allegations of a massive cover-up. The motel referenced in the affidavit has been investigated by other interested parties anxious to seek the truth in the allegations, but not by the Ontario Provincial Police or its Project Truth Team.

The Fort Lauderdale Connection

On 18 September 1998, Gary Guzzo (member of Ontario’s Progressive Conservative Provincial Government) sent a letter marked Private and Confidential to Premier Mike Harris. Therein Guzzo advises the Premier that contrary to what he (Harris) might be told by his Attorney General and Solicitor General, the Project Truth investigation is not progressing as it should and has not followed up on “volumes of information” turned over to the Attorney General and Solicitor General by Perry Dunlop. He elaborates.

Through his contacts in Cornwall, and with a retired policeman in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Guzzo a Catholic, a lawyer and former judge has kept abreast of the investigation and is very familiar with the intricacies of the Cornwall affair and the allegations of a pedophile ring. He has also, at his own expense, travelled to the United States to speak with people “who signed affidavits and made depositions which were served on our government in April 1997.” He concludes: “I can tell you directly that they are not all lying.” As a result of his own personal research Guzzo has learned that “The people who signed affidavits, who made depositions under oath, some of which are inculpatory in nature, have not been interrogated after one- and-a-half years” and he concludes: “I am 100 per cent certain in my own mind that the former owners and operators of the motel on the pedophile strip in Fort Lauderdale, where the complainants stated they were taken on occasion by some of the perpetrators in the 1970s, have not been interrogated, nor have the motel records been requested by the police doing the investigation.” The letter closes on this ominous note: “I do trust you appreciate my concern for the safety of my family and staff . . .” Copies were sent to Charles Harnick, Attorney General, and Bob Runciman, Solicitor General.

Mr. Guzzo again put pen to paper on 23 February 1999, this time telling the Premier that since his previous communication he (Guzzo) has had occasion to spend ten days in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. He writes:

I want you to understand how embarrassing it is for me to attempt to answer the pointed questions of a retired police officer with regard to this issue. This man is in contact on a regular basis with individuals who have visited the Fort Lauderdale area to investigate certain aspects of the allegations made by a number of people in the Cornwall area.

The allegations centre around activities in the late 60s to late 70s and the motel records seem to confirm the attendance at a motel on the “pedophile strip” in the Fort Lauderdale area of certain of the victims and in the company of certain of the people named in the complaints by these victims. The information the retired police officer has received, which information has been confirmed by the undersigned, would indicate that certain key people have not yet been interrogated by the Ontario Provincial Police Project Truth Team. These people include complainants, as well as witnesses and at least in one case, a perpetrator, who has signed an affidavit, which affidavit was filed with the Attorney General of this province and the Solicitor General of this province in April 1997. The person making this affidavit continues to state that he has not been interrogated by the Ontario Provincial Police with regard to this issue.

Finally, he reiterates his concern regarding the potential for accusations of a cover-up at the highest levels:

The fact remains that we are approaching two years since the formal delivery of this information to the two ministries in question. The fact remains that this information was available long before it was formally delivered to the two ministries in question. There may be many reasons why some of these people have not been contacted by investigating officers; however, two of the obvious possible reasons must be dispelled immediately!

The letter was copied to Bob Runciman (Solicitor General), Charles Harnick (Attorney General), and Ron McLaughlin (Chief of Staff, Office of the Premier).

With the exception of the Ottawa Sun, Ontario’s print media has been strangely silent on Guzzo’s courageous and bold interjections. Not a boo from The Ottawa Citizen, the Toronto Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star or The National Post.

Strange indeed from a media which delights in political intrigue.

Since Gary Guzzo’s interjection into the Cornwall affair became public, Project Truth has spread the word that Cornwall is caught in the grips of McCarthyism. And, while welcome talk of McCarthyism ripples through the quiet city streets, Mr. Guzzo has been contacted by a couple who allege that their son was sexually assaulted by one of the Dunlops’ prime suspects! The alleged assault occurred between August 1997 – July 1998 while the Attorney General and the Solicitor General’s office sat on explosive evidence evidence which the honourable ministers did not hand over to the Project Truth team commissioned specifically to investigate the Dunlop allegations.

Asked if anyone from the Diocesan office has talked to them throughout this ordeal, Helen emits a wry chuckle: “Talk to us? No, they don’t talk to me. They don’t talk to us. I don’t even think they talk to God.”

Conclusion

Cover-up? Can there be one iota of doubt?

Prime suspects? There are a number on the loose. A number of them are priests. The have access to children.

Do our bishops care?

Breach of Faith: Breach of Trust? Of the highest order.

From Pain to Hope? For the many victims, the pain won’t go away.

For every child who is molested while the cover-up continues, the pain has just begun.

The victims hope that somehow truth will prevail. They no longer trust the Church to act. They have little faith in the legal system. Perry and Helen hope that someone somewhere cares enough to ensure that justice prevails. They too have lost faith in the hierarchy of the Church: they unfortunately stopped going to Mass when they realized the magnitude of the problem. Pray for them.

Gary Guzzo hopes his government will act. He was a member of the Board of Directors at St. Brigid’s Summer Camp which came under scrutiny six years ago when its founder, Father Ken Keeler was charged with sexual molestation. Father Keeler pleaded guilty after his trial commenced, but not before damning testimony was introduced regarding the then deceased Bishop John Michael Beahen’s sexual proclivities.

Seven long years ago a troubled young man took his allegations of sexual abuse to Church officials in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall. And seven long years ago the bishops of Canada published two glossy-covered booklets sporting pictures of cracks, and rocks, and blooming weeds. Seven long years ago Canadian Catholics trusted that their bishops truly had serious concerns regarding the scandalous, painful and abhorrent problem of clerical molesters; that the bishops really meant it when they called us to “promote actions which will purge this evil from our society”; or when they said the Church should “call its members to unite with those who condemn such forms of aggression”; and when they advised that the Church should avoid “any word or gesture that risks dissuading someone from carrying out his or her duty of reporting a case of child sexual abuse.”

The words sounded so good. However, actions speak louder than words. The bishops have been and are now busy with other “serious” issues. There’s no more talk of purging the evil of clerical molestation from our society and our Church. There hasn’t been for years. Now our “justice”-minded bishops are back to dabbling in economics and high finance. They want the faithful to unite to seek “justice” for countries which have submerged themselves in debt: countries which abort their unborn with abandon, sterilize men and women with alacrity, and offer contraceptives and condoms like candy kisses. No talk now of the mess in their own backyard, or of purging predators from our sanctuaries, just the constant materialistic prattle about something they call “justice” and the dizzying whirl of press releases, signature campaigns, workshops and homilies haranguing one and all to ‘do justice,’ purge the debt and dutifully sign on the dotted line. Meanwhile, the Dunlops are persecuted, sexual predators are on the loose, a molestation which could have been prevented has been reported, and every child and adolescent is at risk.

But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh. (St. Matthew 18: 6,7)

Did You Know?

Bishop Eugene Larocque was Dean of the former Christ the King College in London, Ontario between 1965 and 1968 when “Christ” was removed from the Catholic Boy’s College name to give it a more non-denominational appeal. At that time the College was closely affiliated with St. Peter’s Seminary.

The Charges to Date

Father Charles MacDonald (65): fifteen counts of indecent assault and two of gross indecency.

Arthur Peachy (77), Roman Catholic, family physician, former coroner, team doctor for the Cornwall Royals hockey team, and acting physician for the Cornwall Police: one count of indecent assault and three counts of gross indecency.

Harvey Latour (69), owner of a popular city breakfast diner: one count of indecent assault.

George Lawrence (70), organist and former owner of a music store: one count of indecent assault and one count of gross indecency.

Roch Landry (70), former butcher: three counts of indecent assault and three counts of gross indecency.

Brother George Edmond (Lionel Carrierre) (78), former teacher in Alexandria: two counts of indecent assault.

Father Paul Lapierre (70), formerly of Cornwall, now of Westmount, Quebec: three counts each of indecent assault and gross indecency.

Father Kenneth Martin (68), formerly of Cornwall, now of Pointe Claire Quebec: two counts of indecent assault and one count of gross indecency.

Jacques Leduc (48), lawyer, legal counsel for the Diocese, canon lawyer, married: five counts of sexual assault, six of sexual exploitation, four of procuring the sexual services of someone under age, and one each of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching.

Bernard Sauve (59), entrepreneur: one count each of gross indecency and indecent assault.

A. Malcolm MacDonald (69), Roman Catholic lawyer, former Crown Attorney and Knight of the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem: two counts of indecent assault and one of gross indecency.

Jean Luc LeBlanc (54), bus driver: one count of sexual intercourse with a female, one of indecent assault on a female, three counts of sexual touching, two counts of invitation for a sexual purpose, two of gross indecency, one of obtaining sexual services, one of sexual assault on a female and five of sexual assault on a male.

Chronology of Events in the Cornwall Cover-Up

February 1992: D.S. tells Church officials he was molested by Father Charles MacDonald.

09 December 1992: D.S. reports his allegations to Cornwall Police.

28 January 1993: D.S. is interviewed by Cornwall Police.

16 February 1993: D.S.’s victim’s statement is turned in to Cornwall Police.

02 September 1993: The gag order brokered by Malcolm MacDonald is signed. D.S. receives $32,000.

11 March 1999: Malcolm MacDonald is charged with three counts of sexual assault. One other man is charged. Jacques Leduc has four more charges added to the previous 12. Detective Inspector Grassman says he thinks the investigation will wrap up in the summer.

21 March 1999: Gary Guzzo’s letters to Premier Harris are in the public domain.

03 April 1999: Ottawa Sun reports that a couple claim their son was molested by one of the Dunlop’s prime suspects.

Charged and Convicted in 1986

Father Gilles Deslaurier

When Bishop Adolphe Proulx was at the helm of Alexandria-Cornwall Diocese (1967-1974), a priest by the name of Father Gilles Deslaurier served as his Master of Ceremonies and, for a time, lived in the Bishop’s palace. In 1974, when Bishop Proulx was assigned to the neighbouring Archdiocese of Gatineau-Hull, he was replaced by Father Eugene Larocque a priest from the Archdiocese of London, who was consecrated as Bishop of Alexandria.

After Bishop Larocque assumed control of the Diocese, Father Deslaurier helped out with a variety of diocesan activities. He assisted the Bishop with Religious Vocations for the French sector, served on the Liturgical Commission for the French sector, served on the Pastoral Ministry of Priests, and acted as chaplain in the Catholic Secondary School. For a number of years he was placed in charge of the diocese’s French Cursillo and R3, a French youth Cursillo.

In January 1986, the parents of a young man approached Bishop Eugene Larocque alleging that their son had been sexually molested by Father Deslaurier. When no action was taken, the couple went to the Papal Nuncio, then Angelo Palmas. Following that visit, Bishop Larocque carried out an internal investigation, then contacted the couple and promised that Deslaurier would be kept out of active ministry and relocated to receive therapy in the Gatineau-Hull Diocese (then under the helm of Bishop Proulx). The priest resigned on the 13th of February. One week later he was discovered saying Mass in a Hull parish where he was filling in for the ailing parish priest. The couple went public and eventually nine charges of indecent assault against five boys between 1978 and 1984 were laid against Father Deslaurier.

Deslaurier was found guilty and sentenced to two years probation, reporting to a probation officer and Bishop Proulx. Newspapers of the day reported that Bishop Proulx of the Gatineau-Hull Diocese had volunteered to watch over Deslaurier, an offer which the judge said, “indicates a confidence he has in the future of this person.” The media also reported that Cornwall Police Chief Claude Shaver said Bishop Larocque had been less than cooperative during the investigation. Father Deslaurier moved on to St. Adele, Quebec, and then to Vercheres, Quebec. In 1997 the Ottawa Sun learned that Father Deslaurier was under investigation for new sex allegations in St. Adele.

Priests Charged by Project Truth

Father Charles MacDonald (Father Charlie) was a 35-year-old teacher when he decided to become a priest. He attended Ottawa’s University of Saint Paul Seminary where he was known as “the old man” because of his age. He was ordained in Cornwall in 1969 while Adolphe Proulx was Bishop. According to Faith is Our Strength, a 1994 publication recounting the history of Cornwall’s St. Columban’s Parish, the parish youth groups had ceased to function by the mid 1950s. However, in the 60s “assistant pastor Charles MacDonald organized the youth group and later with the help of the young priest Paul Marchese* the group was quite active.”

While Bishop Proulx was at the helm, Father Charlie served on the Diocesan Marriage Tribunal. Later, under Bishop Larocque, he was elected Dean to the Diocesan Consultors and Senate of the Bishop in the government of the Diocese. He was also placed in charge of the English Cursillo movement and COR (Christ in Others Retreat), a weekend retreat with ongoing activities for youth around the ages of 17-21. For several years the entire Cursillo and youth movements of the diocese were in the hands of Fathers Gilles Deslaurier (French sector) and Charles MacDonald (English sector).

*Father Paul Marchese, a New York resident, attended Ottawa’s University of Saint Paul Seminary and was ordained by then Bishop Adolphe Proulx at St. Columban’s in 1973. Marchese was assigned to that parish “until his return to the Albany, N.Y. Diocese in 1978.”

The Orator has learned that Father Marchese created a bit of a sensation in Albany when he showed up in open-neck shirts and tight pants not the order of clerical attire in those days. He was encountered in this attire one day by an individual who did not know or recognize that Marchese was a priest. Marchese was in the company of a male hairdresser whom he identified as his “companion.” According to officials in the Diocese of Albany, Marchese left Albany in January 1984 and some time later left the priesthood. His last known whereabouts were somewhere in Florida.

Fathers Kenneth Martin and Paul Lapierre were both ordained for the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall by Bishop Brodeur, the former in 1959, the latter in 1958. They both left the diocese in the early 70’s while Bishop Proulx was in charge. Father Lapierre is a brother of Laurier Lapierre, a self-declared homosexual and former lecturer at London, Ontario’s Christ the King College. Prior to his departure from Cornwall, Father Lapierre served as a member of the Diocesan Liturgy Commission, was responsible for the diocese’s marriage prep. programme, and conducted retreats at Villa Fatima in Alexandria. Father Martin, meanwhile, was in charge of diocesan catechetics and served as director of la Sainte-Enfance. The 1973 directory of priests shows both priests residing in Montreal at a common address. At that time, Martin was functioning as a student (he later assumed pastoral responsibilities in the Montreal diocese), and Lapierre was active at St. Jacques Church on St. Catherine Street. Both have retained their incardination in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall while carrying out priestly duties in the Montreal Archdiocese, each eventually assuming pastoral responsibilities in the wealthy English-speaking sectors of the Montreal Archdiocese. Although absent from the Alexandria-Cornwall, it is known that at least Father Lapierre occasionally returned to minister to the flock, witness the following quote from Faith regarding parish missions at St. Columban’s:

Forty hours devotions took place annually with special guest homilists such as Corbin Eddy, a Sulpician priest who was present for the devotions in November 1982 [Father Eddy is now a priest and liturgist in the Archdiocese of Ottawa]. A year earlier, Father Paul Lapierre conducted a successful week-long mission which included homilies each evening from Sunday to Thursday.

In the late 1980s, a spate of sexual abuse charges was levelled against a number of Newfoundland’s diocesan clergy; these were accompanied by revelations of the years of sexual molestation endured by boys at St. John’s Mount Cashel orphanage. To quell demands for action after years of cover-up, Archbishop Penney of St. John’s, Newfoundland commissioned an Enquiry headed by an Anglican, the Honourable Gordon A. Winter, the former Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland. The four other members of the Commission were Sister Nuala P. Kenny, Father Everett MacNeil, Francis G. O’Flaherty, and John A. Scott PhD. The results of the Commission’s efforts were released in 1990 in the three-volume Winter Commission Report.

The Report is a disturbing read in that it quickly becomes apparent that the Commission went to great lengths to shift its focus from the obvious homosexual dimension of the problem at hand. It did acknowledge that its focus on sexual abuse was “the involvement of male children in any form of sexual activity with members of the Roman Catholic clergy.” It also acknowledged that: the cases before it were homosexual in nature; the clerical predators of Newfoundland “engaged in homosexual behaviour by preference”; the boys involved were at least 12 years old when the sexual abuse started and there was therefore “no compelling evidence of classical pedophilia,”; some of the “perpetrators were sexually active with a number of adolescent male partners at any given time” and “also appear to be homosexual,”and; approximately 30% of the diocesan clergy were “homosexual in orientation.” However, despite these stated observations which were categorized as “a statistical anomaly” the Commission refrained from delving into the sphere of homosexuality and completely avoided Church teaching on the subject. Instead, rather than focus on the startling fact that 30% of the clergy had an orientation which is in itself “objectively disordered,” and that a number of Roman Catholic clergy with an “objectively disordered” sexual orientation were actively practising homosexuals, and that a number of the latter were preying on and sexually molesting adolescent males, the Commission chose to take the politically-correct route. So, among other things, the politically-correct Commission indicated that it was disturbed by the “climate of homophobia” in the Archdiocese of St. John’s, advised that this needs to be addressed “if society is to avoid the unnecessary stigmatization of a significant portion of humankind,” and recommended that “Education programmes should direct public attitudes towards a healthy understanding of sexuality with concomitant goals of discouraging sexual stereotyping and homophobia.” In short, the Commission sidestepped the real issue, that of predatory clerical homosexuals. Instead, it took the opportunity to rely on “feminist experience,” bash the patriarchal structure of the Church, and broaden its study to the “larger social issue of child sexual abuse.”

The final Report evoked accolades from Canadian bishops and became akin to their bible on sexual abuse.

The CCCB Steps in

The same year the Report was released yet another clerical sexual scandal of monumental proportions was erupting in Ontario. A number of priests and Brothers were charged when former residents of reform schools run by the Christian Brothers in Alfred and Uxbridge alleged they had been sexually molested while at the schools. This time the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) stepped in to do damage control. An Ad Hoc committee comprising Andr‚ Boyer (Chief of Social Services for Laval, Quebec School Boards), Rita Cadieux (former Deputy-Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission who was actively involved with the UN Commission on the Status of Women and the UN Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities), Father Gerald Copeman (priest from Diocese of Sault Ste. Marie, active with Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace, diocesan director of Cursillo, President of the National Federation of Councils of Priests), Sr. Nuala Patricia Kenny (pediatrician, Professor at Dalhousie University, Halifax and Chief of Pediatrics at the Isaac Walton Killam Hospital for Children in Halifax), Archbishops Roger bacher (Gatineau-Hull, Quebec), Adam Exner OMI (Vancouver, British Columbia) and James MacDonald csc (St. John’s, Newfoundland) was established to address the situation. The committee was chaired by Archbishop bacher who described sexual molestation as “a form of misconduct.”

The Ad Hoc Committee relied on Father Frank Morrissey OMI and Mr.Paul McAuliffe to chair two of its four work groups. Father Morrisey, who enjoys worldwide repute in the field of Canon Law and has been known to offer canonical assistance to dioceses rocked by scandal, believes and lectures that child molesters are not “moral degenerates,” that child molestation is akin to alcoholism which was once viewed as sinful and is now understood to be a disease, that sexual molestation isn’t grounds to defrock a priest, and that it is not “responsible stewardship” to throw away the $250,000 investment that goes into cost of ordaining a Catholic priest. Paul McAuliffe, a worker with the Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, was actually invited onto the Committee after making known his modernist criticisms of the patriarchal structures of the Church and his equally modernist opinion that it is the Church’s misuse of power which “seems” to support child abuse. He was also a known member of the homosexual-friendly Coalition of Concerned Canadian Catholics.

McAuliffe and Father Morrissey, with their two confreres Dr. Jeannine Guindon (professional psychotherapist) and Father Jacques Gagn‚ OMI (former rector at Ottawa’s University of St. Paul Seminary), hammered out guidelines with the able assistance of yet another team of “collaborators.” 1 Included were three interesting personages: Father John Loftus SJ, director of Southdown Centre, a facility which treats clergy and religious with problems of sexuality and/or addiction (Southdown is known to be homosexual-friendly); David McCann, the controversial victim from the Alfred scandal who helped the AIDS Committee of Toronto with its fundraising; and, Father Peter O’Hanley, a priest charged and found guilty of sexual molestation.

The Ad Hoc Committee studied, lauded and was influenced by the Winter Commission Report. In June of 1992 its report, From Pain to Hope, was published by the CCCB. The Report included recommendations that legal fees incurred by priests charged with sexual molestation be picked up by the diocese (read: your contributions) and proposed ways to reintegrate convicted clerical molesters into parishes.

Breach of Trust: Breach of Faith, a compilation of “educational materials” for the general public divided into five study sessions, was published simultaneously. Here we really see what the Ad Hoc Committee is all about. The five study sessions were designed “as a tool for raising awareness and promoting education on all aspects of child sexual abuse.” These consciousness-raising materials quote extensively from the Winter Commission Report, resort to New Age imagery, breathing, visualization and role-playing techniques, suggest that the definition of family “must take into account single parents, common-law relationships and other emerging styles of family life,” promote the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and advance the feminist philosophy that the sexual abuse of children “is perpetuated by ignoring the prevalence of patriarchy in our society.” Like the Winter Commission Report, the Ad Hoc Committee completely avoids Church teaching on homosexuality and takes great pains to ensure that homosexuality retains the acceptable moral and legal status it has acquired in the secular world.

Nowhere in any of these reports and guidelines does one find commonsense guidelines which would guarantee a reduction in the cases of sexual assault by predatory clergy and help to restore faith in the Church, i.e.: compel seminaries to screen-out males with a “homosexual” “sexual orientation”; ensure that any seminarian known to engage in homosexual activity with adults, adolescents or boys is thrown out of the seminary and those engaging in illegal activities are reported to the authorities; defrock all priests who are known homosexuals, and; defrock priests who have been charged and convicted of sexual molestation. Only when such guidelines emerge from the mouths of our tongue-tied bishops will Catholics believe their bishops will purge sexual predators from the ranks of the clergy and bank ‘zero tolerance’ for clerical sexual perversion in all its abhorrent and immoral manifestations. Then, and only then, will Canadian Catholics believe that our bishops truly want to eradicate sexual perversion from the Church, protect children, and restore the sacred dignity of the priesthood.

Footnote

Stephen Amesse (then a Senate Research Assistant, ordained to the priesthood at St. Patrick’s Basilica, Ottawa, April 1999 at age 41),

Jeffrey King (then an Ottawa lawyer and staunch supporter of the Liberal Party of Canada, recently ordained to the priesthood at Ottawa’s St. Patrick’s Basilica at age 58),

Dr. Jocelyn Aubut (psychiatrist),

Charlene Belleau (sexual abuse research coordinator for the Cariboo Tribal Council in British Columbia),

Father L Pigeon OMI (retired professor with the Faculty of Education at University of Ottawa),

Father Terrence Prendergast SJ (then professor at Regis College in Toronto’s St. Michael’s University, now Bishop of Halifax),

Msgr. Jean-Marc Robillard (director of formation for future priests with the Diocese of St. Hyacinthe, Quebec),

Dr. Gilles Schrer (psychiatrist at the Institut Pinel de Montreal).

Seven long years ago, in February of 1992, D.S., a former altar boy, approached officials in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall asking for an apology. He claimed he had been sexually molested by a local parish priest, Father Charles MacDonald. He just wanted an apology. None was forthcoming.

Eleven months later, in early December, this same troubled young man turned to the Cornwall Police Services (Cornwall Police) for help. He recounted his allegations. He told police he had been sexually molested by Father Charles MacDonald (Father Charlie), and that he had also been molested by Ken Seguin, a local probation officer and good friend of the priest. Another full month later, in early January 1993, D.S. was interviewed by police and asked to prepare a written statement: the eight-page handwritten statement outlining details of the allegations was turned over to police on the 16th of February 1993.

Ten months after the Cornwall police first became aware of the allegations and twenty-one months after the diocesan centre heard of them Father Charles MacDonald was still functioning as a parish priest: the allegations against him were unknown to Catholic parents, the police investigation had been terminated, and his file was secreted in the recesses of the police station. Secreted, that is, until Constable Perry Dunlop happened on the scene.

Since then, the city of Cornwall has been rocked by whispered rumours and allegations which slowly and sporadically unfolded in an unprecedented fashion. As one bizarre scenario followed the other, the allegations of sexual molestation mushroomed; a number of young men have now stepped forward alleging that they too were sexually molested by Father Charlie. And, in this homey and unpretentious city of 46,000 nestled on the banks of the St. Lawrence River, there arewhispers of clandestine visits by prominent Cornwall officials and clergy to motels in Fort Lauderdale, Florida in a district known for its prostitution of young boys. And there is talk of covert meetings between prominent citizens and clergy, of pornography, of cover-up, and of a “pedophile clan.”

Allegations of a “pedophile clan,” alias “the clan,” first came to light years ago when Perry Dunlop asserted that such a clan was operating within the Church and within the city. Sceptics laughed. However, to date, after interviewing in the order of 940 people, a provincial police force probe into the allegations has seen more than 70 charges laid against twelve men for sex offences against 25 victims. More charges are anticipated. Of the twelve males charged to date, three are Roman Catholic priests, two are Roman Catholic lawyers directly involved in the D.S. case, one is a Brother who had previously taught in a local Roman Catholic school, and one is a Roman Catholic physician and coroner who had served as team physician to the hockey team, served as acting physician for the Cornwall Police and been active in his parish. Apart from the probe, local police have charged a teacher in a local Catholic school. Several of the victims allege they were molested by more than one suspect, and a number of the suspects are known to be friends or acquaintances.

According to The Ottawa Sun (13 March 1999), the Ontario Provincial Police now “are looking at the possibility that Cornwall police and the Catholic Church conspired to abort a probe into sexual abuse allegations after the complainant [D.S.] received hush money.”

“From Pain to Hope”?

As D.S. was mustering up the courage to confront the demons of his youth, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) was confronting its own demons. Faced with the embarrassing and steadily mounting number of charges of sexual abuse on young males by Canadian clergy and male religious, the CCCB published two booklets: From Pain to Hope: Report from the Ad Hoc Committee on Child Sexual Abuse and Breach of Trust: Breach of Faith. From Pain to Hope, a small wine-covered booklet, sports a picture of a weed growing out of a crack in a rock and reaching up toward the sunlight. Here it is acknowledged that “the Church has lost a great deal of credibility over the past few years due to these scandals and the suspicion that there were attempts to conceal these intolerable acts,” and advises that the Church should “call its members to unite with those who condemn such forms of aggression.” One of the guiding principles underlying the final recommendations is “carefully avoiding any word or gesture that risks dissuading someone from carrying out his or her duty of reporting a case of child sexual abuse.”

Breach of Faith, a glossy blue-covered compilation of materials for workshop discussions, sports a large crack running diagonally across the cover and, according to the introduction, is designed to increase awareness of sexual abuse and “promote actions that will purge this evil from society and the Church.”

Despite the Ad Hoc Committee’s strong tendency to broaden the issue at hand well beyond that of clerical homosexual predators, coupled with its modernist overtones and heavy reliance on the blatantly pro-homosexual pro-feminist Winter Commission Report (a three-volume report compiled by an Anglican at the bequest of then Archbishop Penney of St. John’s, Newfoundland in response largely to the Mount Cashel boys orphanage scandals), the overall intent of the CCCB sounded good: avoid “any word or gesture that risks dissuading someone from carrying out his or her duty of reporting a case of child sexual abuse,” “unite with those who condemn such forms of aggression,” and “promote actions which will purge this evil from our society.”

However, the dirty dark secrets oozing into the light of day in Cornwall belie those stated good intentions, and put into serious question the intention of the bishops individually or collectively to “purge this evil from our society.”

The Nightmare Begins

In September 1993, almost one full year after D.S. first took his allegations against Father Charlie to the Cornwall Police, Perry Dunlop, a young, fresh-faced, clean-cut Roman Catholic police officer (a convert to the Faith in 1991), inadvertently stumbled upon the D.S. victim’s statement. To his dismay, he quickly discovered that: (a) the file was lying dormant; (b) the victim, had reputedly made a monetary settlement with the diocese and asked that the case be dropped; (c) other victims had been discovered and no investigation conducted into the new allegations; and (d) contrary to routine police procedure, the file was being secreted. For Dunlop, the allegations in the victim’s statement were believable and extremely disturbing. He believed they warranted scrutiny and investigation. Furthermore, Father Charlie was his parish priest, had officiated at his wedding, baptised his first daughter and was still functioning as a priest with free and unlimited access to children.

Dunlop finally realized that the complaint was going nowhere. However, he also realized that the Ontario Child and Family Services Act requires professionals such as police officers to report suspected cases of child abuse to the Children’s Aid Society (CAS) “despite the provisions of any other act,” so he copied the victim’s statement and eventually turned it over to the CAS. Unbeknownst to him, that decisive act started the ball rolling. When the statement was later leaked to the media by an unknown source (Dunlop denies it was he), the lid started to come off the garbage can. And, from that moment on, things have never been the same for Perry Dunlop, his stalwart and highly supportive wife Helen, their three little girls, or the unassuming family-oriented community of Cornwall.

The Persecution

In those six years, despite a strong and constantly growing base of support, the Dunlops have been vilified, ostracized, ridiculed, and scorned, often by clergy and fellow Catholics. D.S. sued the Cornwall Police for breach of trust when his victim’s statement got to the media. He reached an out-of-court settlement. He had also launched a suit against Perry when he was led to believe Perry was the bad guy. He later dropped the charges. Perry’s own police force charged him with discreditable conduct for releasing the victim’s statement to the CAS. A Board of Inquiry was conducted: he was cleared. The ruling was appealed. Again he was exonerated. Throughout this ordeal, the beleaguered constable was forced to go on stress leave for three years. Bad enough. But then there were the death threats: death threats directed at Perry and Helen, and, unbelievable as it seems, death threats to their little girls. In the latter instance, a woman was formally charged after leaving a message on the Dunlops’ answering machine threatening to kill their eldest daughter, then all of six-years-old. The woman entered a plea of guilty and received one year probation. Incredibly, the woman was tried, convicted, sentenced and foot-loose and fancy-free on the streets before the Dunlops learned from a neighbour that the case had even gone to court. No chance then to make a victim impact statement in court. No chance to beg the court to impose a restraining order to keep the woman away from their home and their daughter’s school. They lived in fear.

And still the drama unfolded. There were no less than three investigations into the dealings of the Cornwall Police regarding a “cover-up.” An internal investigation discovered no wrongdoing. A second investigation conducted by the Ottawa Police also cleared the Force. And yet a third investigation conducted by the Ontario Provincial Police again cleared the Cornwall Police. In time, Perry launched a 1.25 million-dollar lawsuit against a number of parties including several police officers, the Cornwall Police, and the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall. No one from the justice-oriented CCCB offered to aid the beleaguered Dunlops move “from pain to hope.” Nor did the CCCB “call its members to unite with those who condemn such forms of aggression.”
The Years of Turbulence: More Scandal

While the legal quagmire played itself out in the media, other bizarre events were coming to light. A lawyer instrumental in securing the financial settlement for D.S. was charged with obstruction of justice (he pleaded guilty and received an absolute discharge). And Claude Shaver, police chief at the time the deal went through, publicly claimed he had been so incensed when he found out about the Church’s deal and the fact that Father Charlie was still functioning in a parish that he went right to Archbishop Carlo Curis, the Papal Nuncio, with his concerns. Some wonder why this action was delayed, and why it transpired after the cat was out of the bag, i.e., five weeks after the deal was signed and one week after Perry turned the victim’s statement over to the CAS. Regardless, action was taken and, without explanation, Father Charlie suddenly disappeared from the parish and was off to Southdown, a rehabilitation centre for clergy and religious, for assessment.

Shortly thereafter, Police Chief Shaver announced his early retirement, and, shortly after that announcement, Father’s close friend, the 49-year-old probation officer accused alongside him in the D.S. victim’s statement, committed suicide. (Last year a second probation officer committed suicide. He had previously been charged and convicted and was again under investigation for committing other sexual offences). And, on the 1st of March 1994, the local Children’s Aid Society addressed a letter to Father Charles MacDonald advising that after a “thorough investigation and careful consideration of all available information, the Society has concluded there is sufficient information to support a finding that you sexually molested [D.S.] when he was a child.” Two years passed. Finally, in 1996, Father Charlie was charged. In short, those were turbulent years.

As this very public drama played out, not once did the Bishop or any official from the Diocesan Centre step forward to enquire as to the Dunlops’ spiritual, physical and financial well-being.

As the turmoil and scandal increased, so too did the Dunlops’ resolve to see justice done, and so did the numbers of young men who courageously stepped forward to recount their allegations of molestation by the same Father Charlie. There were difficulties even with that step. Perry’s brother-in-law, Carson Chisholm, recounts how he had personally accompanied one of Father Charlie’s victims to the Cornwall police station and was shocked to find that every policeman in the office refused to “touch, take or even look at” the written allegations against Father Charlie by a new victim. That hurdle was surmounted and, as mentioned previously, charges were finally laid against Father Charlie in 1996. In January 1998, following a lengthy preliminary hearing, the court determined that there was sufficient evidence in seven counts of indecent assault on three former altar boys for Father Charlie to be tried. He has pleaded not guilty: the case has yet to go to trial. Meanwhile Father was back in court this year facing another raft of charges in yet another preliminary hearing. He awaits the judge’s decision on those allegations.

But there is more to the Cornwall debacle than Father Charlie. As the months, days and hours roll by, Perry and Helen listen and sometimes cry as one distraught victim after another arrives on their door step, or picks up the phone, to unburden his painful memories of molestation at the hands of a sexual predator. In those six years, the Dunlops have amassed both a wealth of information about the sordid underworld of molestation and a burgeoning who’s who for that dark underside of Cornwall and its “particular church,” the Diocese of Alexander-Cornwall.

Prime Suspects / “The Clan”

In time, the Dunlops became convinced that a ring of pedophiles, “the clan,” was operative in the city stretching vertically within the Church and horizontally into the community. Although some of the alleged suspects were married men, and some molested young girls, they had one thing in common a depraved sexual interest in young boys, their predatory activities ranging from fondling to sodomy. Armed with reams of information, the pair became relentless in their attempts to see justice done and childhood innocence protected. Silence or rebuffs were the order of the day. Oftentimes the daunting task seemed futile, but there was no turning back. That’s not their way. Besides, there were, and are, children, at risk. The information was given to police. Nothing.

Time and again the undaunted duo unloaded mountains of files, naming names and citing evidence, on any and all influential persons who would give them the time of day. Finally, in April 1997, in desperation and as a last resort, the whole sorry mess of sordid material was deposited with Charles Harnick, Ontario’s Attorney General, and also with the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services, a sort of police force watchdog in the offices of Bob Runciman, the Solicitor General.

Initially, the Dunlops’ persistence and perseverance seemed to have paid off. The Ontario Provincial Police was back in on the deal, and, several months later, in August 1997, Project Truth, an investigative team comprising one inspector and four detectives, was formed to investigate the Dunlops’ persistent charge of a pedophile ring. The Dunlops understood that the names of suspects and corroborating evidence had been transmitted in its totality to the team. Not so. In July 1998, eleven months after Project Truth began, charges were laid against seven men. The Dunlops were confused and less than impressed. The names of many prominent suspects contained in their files were not on the list. Only then did they discover that, according to the Project Truth team, the full package of documentation had not been received from provincial authorities (i.e., the Attorney General and Solicitor General’s office). The missing information was crucial to a thorough investigation and at the heart of the allegations of a pedophile ring. Again Perry turned over a full package of the information, this time directly to Project Truth. The accompanying receipt is signed by a Detective Sergeant with the team and reads:

31 July 1998

Received from Constable Perry Dunlop of the Cornwall Police Service –

Four volumes of documents marked “Submission by Constable P. Dunlop, of the Cornwall Police Service.”

The Ontario Provincial Police “Project Truth Investigators” never received the full package that was delivered to the Office of the Attorney General, or the Office of the Solicitor General, Ontario Civilian Commission on Policing Services that was hand delivered on the 8th of April 1997 to the said offices by Constable Perry Dunlop.

Now, a full twenty months after Project Truth was formed to investigate allegations of a pedophile ring, a total of twelve men has been charged. Only a few of those charged to date were named by the Dunlops, the others were unfamiliar to them and seem to have sprung from new allegations stemming from the vast publicity surrounding the probe. Recently, for a second time, there was word that the probe was wrapping up. Presumably its mission is accomplished.

The three investigative hands-on members of the team are now busy preparing themselves and their files for the imminent raft of court cases. Since a hands-on investigative detective must be present in each court case to assist the Crown Attorney, it is logical to assume that no serious investigative work is being conducted. Here the disconcerting bottom line is that, unless this skeleton staff receives reinforcements, there is no hope that further charges will be forthcoming. And twenty months later, Perry and Helen watch and wait in disbelief as a number of suspects known to them predominantly clergy remain at large.

Not once has the diocese offered to help the Dunlops “purge this evil from our society.”

The Gag Order

What’s going on?

The plot thickens . . .

To say this dark drama smacks of a cover-up of monumental proportions is putting it mildly. The magnitude of the cover-up can best be grasped by honing in on three aspects of the Cornwall nightmare: (1) the hush money (2) the allegations of clerical debauchery, and (3) the Fort Lauderdale connection. And more scandal . . .

Let’s go back a few years.

When Perry first stumbled upon D.S.’s allegation against Father Charlie and Ken Seguin (the probation officer) he had no idea that he was about to blow the lid off an agreement crafted to keep the sordid allegations against Father Charlie under wraps and the priest’s good reputation intact. And given that he hadn’t the faintest idea that such an agreement existed, he certainly had not the slightest inkling that it was crafted by two Roman Catholic lawyers (one diocesan) who would themselves, several years hence, face formal criminal charges for sexually abusing young boys.

Here’s the way the scenario played out.

In the Fall of 1993, Perry was told the investigation into allegations against Father Charlie had been terminated because the victim had received a monetary settlement. As mentioned previously, Perry took action and went to the CAS based on that fact alone: he had no idea there were strings attached to the deal. By early January 1994 the media had latched onto the story and word was out in the public domain that the diocese had made a $32,000 payout to an alleged victim. Some were saying the deal was hush money, which silenced D.S. and precluded any legal action regarding his allegations against Father Charlie.

The denials began.

A gag order was flatly denied by Jacques Leduc, a 43-year-old diocesan lawyer, canon lawyer and longtime member of the Diocesan Marriage Tribunal. Leduc admitted there was a financial settlement, but insisted it was never the intention of the diocese to keep D.S. from speaking to police. Bishop Eugene Larocque also denied a gag order. But he acknowledged the payout. According to Larocque, he had initially been opposed to it (the payout) and had even consulted some of his fellow bishops (unnamed) who all said “Don’t give in.” However, the Bishop explained that, he “gave in” and “reluctantly” made the payout because D.S. “had a considerable bill of counselling charges for a psychologist, and he needed help.” The bishop also stressed to the media that he did not believe the priest committed an assault. The implication to one and all was that an unstable D.S. had lied about being molested, coerced money from charitable and empathetic diocesan officials, and was now lying about a gag order.

Meanwhile, an angry and fearful D.S. insisted that he had never asked the diocese for money, all he wanted was an apology. The money, he said, was offered after he confronted Church officials with his allegations, and was accepted only when he realized that the police investigation seemed to be going nowhere. He likewise insisted that the settlement contained a gag order. It became their word against his.
When the contents of the legal document entered the public domain, they did indeed contain a gag order. The document, addressed to “Father Charles MacDonald and to the Most Reverend Eugene P. Larocque, Bishop, and to his successors and assigns, and to the Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation for the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall in Ontario,” contains the following clauses:

In addition to the aforesaid release and for said consideration, I hereby undertake not to take any legal proceedings, civil or criminal, against any of the parties hereto and will immediately terminate any actions that may now be in process.

In addition to the aforesaid release and for the said consideration I further hereby undertake not to disclose or permit disclosure directly or indirectly of any of the terms of this settlement or of any of the events alleged to have occurred. Breach of this undertaking will constitute a breach of settlement agreement as evidenced by this release and I will refund all amounts paid to me forthwith.

And for the said consideration, I further agree not to make claim or take any proceeding or participate in same, against any other person or corporation who might claim contribution or indemnity under the provisions of the Negligence Act and the Amendments thereto from the person, persons or corporations discharged from this release.

There seemed to be little hope that Church officials were “carefully avoiding any word or gesture that risks dissuading someone from carrying out his or her duty of reporting a case of child sexual abuse.”

The agreement, dated the 2nd of September 1993, was signed by D.S. and his lawyer Sean Adams. It had been brokered by Father Charlie’s lawyer, Malcolm MacDonald. And diocesan lawyer Jacques Leduc was in on the deal. The same Jacques Leduc who, on behalf of the Diocese, had so adamantly denied the gag order and made D.S. look like a pathological liar. Bishop Larocque called a press conference and shades of Police Chief Shaver quickly attempted to exonerate himself. The Bishop explained that he had made his previous statement denying the gag order “in accord with instructions received from our Diocesan counsel,” and that “I have since learned that the signed release does in fact rule out both civil and criminal action.” The Bishop then encouraged D.S. to go to the police with his allegations. D.S. was not impressed. “This is the way he’s dealt with me all along. I was the victim and all he’s done is make me look like a liar,” said D.S., who believed that Bishop Laroque’s turnaround came “a year too late.”

Following exposure of the fiasco, Jacques Leduc’s legal services with the diocese terminated, but his name still appears as a member of the Diocesan Tribunal. And Malcolm MacDonald, a former Crown Attorney, was charged with obstruction of justice, pleaded guilty, and received an absolute discharge.

The Criminal Charges

In June of 1998, nearly five years after the financial settlement with its gag order was signed, sealed and delivered, Jacques Leduc former legal counsel for the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall, former chair of the local Roman Catholic School Board, and longtime member of the Diocesan Marriage Tribunal was charged with four counts of sexual assault, four of sexual exploitation, two of procuring the services of someone under age, and one each of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching. And still his name appeared as a member of the Tribunal. In March of 1999 four more charges were laid against Jacques Leduc.

There’s more. In March of 1999, nearly two full years after Project Truth commenced its investigation, Malcolm MacDonald was formally charged with two counts of indecent assault and one count of gross indecency. This is the same Malcolm MacDonald who was Knighted into the elite Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, Knights Hospitallers, in October 1993 mere weeks after the gag order was signed and sealed. This papal honour was conferred upon “Brother Malcolm MacDonald” in recognition of his achievements and contributions to his community.

Perry’s brother-in-law Carson Chisholm tells how he once managed to gain access to Bishop Eugene Larocque to try to get the Bishop to sign a petition. The petition affirmed that Perry did the right thing in reporting the D.S. case to the CAS. Not only did Bishop Larocque refuse to sign the petition, he told Chisholm that Perry Dunlop should be punished for what he did.

Allegations of Clerical Debauchery

As the allegations of sexual molestation, legal misdemeanours, and cover-up proliferated, a married middle-aged man now residing in the United States was determining to wipe his own slate clean. He had been involved with “the clan” himself, first as a young boy and later as an adult. According to the Ottawa Sun, “Richard” stepped into the fray because “This thing has been eating me alive inside-out. I think about it every single day.” He was even willing to incriminate himself, recognizing only too well that in the process, the police “are probably going to put the screws to me.” But he wanted to clean the slate.

So, in November 1996 Richard signed an affidavit. The information and allegations contained therein are extremely damning for a number of highly-respected individuals and, if verified, leave no doubt that a ring of molesters has been operating in Cornwall for a number of years. According to Richard, a number of Cornwall men are part of a “clan” of pedophiles. He names them. And, it’s a shocker. The names include those of several prominent men and a number of Roman Catholic clergy. A few of the suspects are now deceased, others are functioning in various capacities in their environs.

Richard alleges that he attended clan parties and witnessed “sexual improprieties, molestation, fondling, oral sex, intercourse (anal) between the above-named ‘clan’ members and minors through the period of 1957 or 1958 to 1993.” He numerically names some of those who attended the parties, concluding with #34: “Male prostitutes both adults and juveniles, altar boys and several others.” He recalls one party which included “a ceremonious ritual of candles in the Altar Boys rectums with sheets over them. These Altar Boys were walking around with the candle in the rectum and sheets over them with no clothes on, during this ceremony, several members of the clergy were fondling these boys and molesting them.” He continues, “all of the aforementioned priests committed illegal, inappropriate and perverse sexual acts against myself as a minor.” He also talks of a cache of pornographic pictures of young Cornwall boys taken with a Polaroid camera, and he recounts events leading up to Ken Seguin’s death.

Richard alleges that the clan had a number of meeting places, most of them in or around Cornwall. But an important point the clan also met in the United States. According to the affidavit, clan members travelled to Fort Lauderdale, Florida on a fairly regular basis where they would frequent an area called Birch Avenue and a certain motel which he names.

The information contained in this eight-page legal document, which names names and references a specific motel on the ‘pedophile strip’ in Fort Lauderdale, is now at the core of mounting allegations of a massive cover-up. The motel referenced in the affidavit has been investigated by other interested parties anxious to seek the truth in the allegations, but not by the Ontario Provincial Police or its Project Truth Team.

The Fort Lauderdale Connection

On 18 September 1998, Gary Guzzo (member of Ontario’s Progressive Conservative Provincial Government) sent a letter marked Private and Confidential to Premier Mike Harris. Therein Guzzo advises the Premier that contrary to what he (Harris) might be told by his Attorney General and Solicitor General, the Project Truth investigation is not progressing as it should and has not followed up on “volumes of information” turned over to the Attorney General and Solicitor General by Perry Dunlop. He elaborates.

Through his contacts in Cornwall, and with a retired policeman in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Guzzo a Catholic, a lawyer and former judge has kept abreast of the investigation and is very familiar with the intricacies of the Cornwall affair and the allegations of a pedophile ring. He has also, at his own expense, travelled to the United States to speak with people “who signed affidavits and made depositions which were served on our government in April 1997.” He concludes: “I can tell you directly that they are not all lying.” As a result of his own personal research Guzzo has learned that “The people who signed affidavits, who made depositions under oath, some of which are inculpatory in nature, have not been interrogated after one- and-a-half years” and he concludes: “I am 100 per cent certain in my own mind that the former owners and operators of the motel on the pedophile strip in Fort Lauderdale, where the complainants stated they were taken on occasion by some of the perpetrators in the 1970s, have not been interrogated, nor have the motel records been requested by the police doing the investigation.” The letter closes on this ominous note: “I do trust you appreciate my concern for the safety of my family and staff . . .” Copies were sent to Charles Harnick, Attorney General, and Bob Runciman, Solicitor General.

Mr. Guzzo again put pen to paper on 23 February 1999, this time telling the Premier that since his previous communication he (Guzzo) has had occasion to spend ten days in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. He writes:

I want you to understand how embarrassing it is for me to attempt to answer the pointed questions of a retired police officer with regard to this issue. This man is in contact on a regular basis with individuals who have visited the Fort Lauderdale area to investigate certain aspects of the allegations made by a number of people in the Cornwall area.

The allegations centre around activities in the late 60s to late 70s and the motel records seem to confirm the attendance at a motel on the “pedophile strip” in the Fort Lauderdale area of certain of the victims and in the company of certain of the people named in the complaints by these victims. The information the retired police officer has received, which information has been confirmed by the undersigned, would indicate that certain key people have not yet been interrogated by the Ontario Provincial Police Project Truth Team. These people include complainants, as well as witnesses and at least in one case, a perpetrator, who has signed an affidavit, which affidavit was filed with the Attorney General of this province and the Solicitor General of this province in April 1997. The person making this affidavit continues to state that he has not been interrogated by the Ontario Provincial Police with regard to this issue.

Finally, he reiterates his concern regarding the potential for accusations of a cover-up at the highest levels:

The fact remains that we are approaching two years since the formal delivery of this information to the two ministries in question. The fact remains that this information was available long before it was formally delivered to the two ministries in question. There may be many reasons why some of these people have not been contacted by investigating officers; however, two of the obvious possible reasons must be dispelled immediately!

The letter was copied to Bob Runciman (Solicitor General), Charles Harnick (Attorney General), and Ron McLaughlin (Chief of Staff, Office of the Premier).

With the exception of the Ottawa Sun, Ontario’s print media has been strangely silent on Guzzo’s courageous and bold interjections. Not a boo from The Ottawa Citizen, the Toronto Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star or The National Post.

Strange indeed from a media which delights in political intrigue.

Since Gary Guzzo’s interjection into the Cornwall affair became public, Project Truth has spread the word that Cornwall is caught in the grips of McCarthyism. And, while welcome talk of McCarthyism ripples through the quiet city streets, Mr. Guzzo has been contacted by a couple who allege that their son was sexually assaulted by one of the Dunlops’ prime suspects! The alleged assault occurred between August 1997 – July 1998 while the Attorney General and the Solicitor General’s office sat on explosive evidence evidence which the honourable ministers did not hand over to the Project Truth team commissioned specifically to investigate the Dunlop allegations.

Asked if anyone from the Diocesan office has talked to them throughout this ordeal, Helen emits a wry chuckle: “Talk to us? No, they don’t talk to me. They don’t talk to us. I don’t even think they talk to God.”

Conclusion

Cover-up? Can there be one iota of doubt?

Prime suspects? There are a number on the loose. A number of them are priests. The have access to children.

Do our bishops care?

Breach of Faith: Breach of Trust? Of the highest order.

From Pain to Hope? For the many victims, the pain won’t go away.

For every child who is molested while the cover-up continues, the pain has just begun.

The victims hope that somehow truth will prevail. They no longer trust the Church to act. They have little faith in the legal system. Perry and Helen hope that someone somewhere cares enough to ensure that justice prevails. They too have lost faith in the hierarchy of the Church: they unfortunately stopped going to Mass when they realized the magnitude of the problem. Pray for them.

Gary Guzzo hopes his government will act. He was a member of the Board of Directors at St. Brigid’s Summer Camp which came under scrutiny six years ago when its founder, Father Ken Keeler was charged with sexual molestation. Father Keeler pleaded guilty after his trial commenced, but not before damning testimony was introduced regarding the then deceased Bishop John Michael Beahen’s sexual proclivities.

Seven long years ago a troubled young man took his allegations of sexual abuse to Church officials in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall. And seven long years ago the bishops of Canada published two glossy-covered booklets sporting pictures of cracks, and rocks, and blooming weeds. Seven long years ago Canadian Catholics trusted that their bishops truly had serious concerns regarding the scandalous, painful and abhorrent problem of clerical molesters; that the bishops really meant it when they called us to “promote actions which will purge this evil from our society”; or when they said the Church should “call its members to unite with those who condemn such forms of aggression”; and when they advised that the Church should avoid “any word or gesture that risks dissuading someone from carrying out his or her duty of reporting a case of child sexual abuse.”

The words sounded so good. However, actions speak louder than words. The bishops have been and are now busy with other “serious” issues. There’s no more talk of purging the evil of clerical molestation from our society and our Church. There hasn’t been for years. Now our “justice”-minded bishops are back to dabbling in economics and high finance. They want the faithful to unite to seek “justice” for countries which have submerged themselves in debt: countries which abort their unborn with abandon, sterilize men and women with alacrity, and offer contraceptives and condoms like candy kisses. No talk now of the mess in their own backyard, or of purging predators from our sanctuaries, just the constant materialistic prattle about something they call “justice” and the dizzying whirl of press releases, signature campaigns, workshops and homilies haranguing one and all to ‘do justice,’ purge the debt and dutifully sign on the dotted line. Meanwhile, the Dunlops are persecuted, sexual predators are on the loose, a molestation which could have been prevented has been reported, and every child and adolescent is at risk.

But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh. (St. Matthew 18: 6,7)

Did You Know?

Bishop Eugene Larocque was Dean of the former Christ the King College in London, Ontario between 1965 and 1968 when “Christ” was removed from the Catholic Boy’s College name to give it a more non-denominational appeal. At that time the College was closely affiliated with St. Peter’s Seminary.

The Charges to Date

Father Charles MacDonald (65): fifteen counts of indecent assault and two of gross indecency.

Arthur Peachy (77), Roman Catholic, family physician, former coroner, team doctor for the Cornwall Royals hockey team, and acting physician for the Cornwall Police: one count of indecent assault and three counts of gross indecency.

Harvey Latour (69), owner of a popular city breakfast diner: one count of indecent assault.

George Lawrence (70), organist and former owner of a music store: one count of indecent assault and one count of gross indecency.

Roch Landry (70), former butcher: three counts of indecent assault and three counts of gross indecency.

Brother George Edmond (Lionel Carrierre) (78), former teacher in Alexandria: two counts of indecent assault.

Father Paul Lapierre (70), formerly of Cornwall, now of Westmount, Quebec: three counts each of indecent assault and gross indecency.

Father Kenneth Martin (68), formerly of Cornwall, now of Pointe Claire Quebec: two counts of indecent assault and one count of gross indecency.

Jacques Leduc (48), lawyer, legal counsel for the Diocese, canon lawyer, married: five counts of sexual assault, six of sexual exploitation, four of procuring the sexual services of someone under age, and one each of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching.

Bernard Sauve (59), entrepreneur: one count each of gross indecency and indecent assault.

A. Malcolm MacDonald (69), Roman Catholic lawyer, former Crown Attorney and Knight of the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem: two counts of indecent assault and one of gross indecency.

Jean Luc LeBlanc (54), bus driver: one count of sexual intercourse with a female, one of indecent assault on a female, three counts of sexual touching, two counts of invitation for a sexual purpose, two of gross indecency, one of obtaining sexual services, one of sexual assault on a female and five of sexual assault on a male.

Chronology of Events in the Cornwall Cover-Up

February 1992: D.S. tells Church officials he was molested by Father Charles MacDonald.

09 December 1992: D.S. reports his allegations to Cornwall Police.

28 January 1993: D.S. is interviewed by Cornwall Police.

16 February 1993: D.S.’s victim’s statement is turned in to Cornwall Police.

02 September 1993: The gag order brokered by Malcolm MacDonald is signed. D.S. receives $32,000.

11 March 1999: Malcolm MacDonald is charged with three counts of sexual assault. One other man is charged. Jacques Leduc has four more charges added to the previous 12. Detective Inspector Grassman says he thinks the investigation will wrap up in the summer.

21 March 1999: Gary Guzzo’s letters to Premier Harris are in the public domain.

03 April 1999: Ottawa Sun reports that a couple claim their son was molested by one of the Dunlop’s prime suspects.

Charged and Convicted in 1986

Father Gilles Deslaurier

When Bishop Adolphe Proulx was at the helm of Alexandria-Cornwall Diocese (1967-1974), a priest by the name of Father Gilles Deslaurier served as his Master of Ceremonies and, for a time, lived in the Bishop’s palace. In 1974, when Bishop Proulx was assigned to the neighbouring Archdiocese of Gatineau-Hull, he was replaced by Father Eugene Larocque a priest from the Archdiocese of London, who was consecrated as Bishop of Alexandria.

After Bishop Larocque assumed control of the Diocese, Father Deslaurier helped out with a variety of diocesan activities. He assisted the Bishop with Religious Vocations for the French sector, served on the Liturgical Commission for the French sector, served on the Pastoral Ministry of Priests, and acted as chaplain in the Catholic Secondary School. For a number of years he was placed in charge of the diocese’s French Cursillo and R3, a French youth Cursillo.

In January 1986, the parents of a young man approached Bishop Eugene Larocque alleging that their son had been sexually molested by Father Deslaurier. When no action was taken, the couple went to the Papal Nuncio, then Angelo Palmas. Following that visit, Bishop Larocque carried out an internal investigation, then contacted the couple and promised that Deslaurier would be kept out of active ministry and relocated to receive therapy in the Gatineau-Hull Diocese (then under the helm of Bishop Proulx). The priest resigned on the 13th of February. One week later he was discovered saying Mass in a Hull parish where he was filling in for the ailing parish priest. The couple went public and eventually nine charges of indecent assault against five boys between 1978 and 1984 were laid against Father Deslaurier.

Deslaurier was found guilty and sentenced to two years probation, reporting to a probation officer and Bishop Proulx. Newspapers of the day reported that Bishop Proulx of the Gatineau-Hull Diocese had volunteered to watch over Deslaurier, an offer which the judge said, “indicates a confidence he has in the future of this person.” The media also reported that Cornwall Police Chief Claude Shaver said Bishop Larocque had been less than cooperative during the investigation. Father Deslaurier moved on to St. Adele, Quebec, and then to Vercheres, Quebec. In 1997 the Ottawa Sun learned that Father Deslaurier was under investigation for new sex allegations in St. Adele.

Priests Charged by Project Truth

Father Charles MacDonald (Father Charlie) was a 35-year-old teacher when he decided to become a priest. He attended Ottawa’s University of Saint Paul Seminary where he was known as “the old man” because of his age. He was ordained in Cornwall in 1969 while Adolphe Proulx was Bishop. According to Faith is Our Strength, a 1994 publication recounting the history of Cornwall’s St. Columban’s Parish, the parish youth groups had ceased to function by the mid 1950s. However, in the 60s “assistant pastor Charles MacDonald organized the youth group and later with the help of the young priest Paul Marchese* the group was quite active.”

While Bishop Proulx was at the helm, Father Charlie served on the Diocesan Marriage Tribunal. Later, under Bishop Larocque, he was elected Dean to the Diocesan Consultors and Senate of the Bishop in the government of the Diocese. He was also placed in charge of the English Cursillo movement and COR (Christ in Others Retreat), a weekend retreat with ongoing activities for youth around the ages of 17-21. For several years the entire Cursillo and youth movements of the diocese were in the hands of Fathers Gilles Deslaurier (French sector) and Charles MacDonald (English sector).

*Father Paul Marchese, a New York resident, attended Ottawa’s University of Saint Paul Seminary and was ordained by then Bishop Adolphe Proulx at St. Columban’s in 1973. Marchese was assigned to that parish “until his return to the Albany, N.Y. Diocese in 1978.”

The Orator has learned that Father Marchese created a bit of a sensation in Albany when he showed up in open-neck shirts and tight pants not the order of clerical attire in those days. He was encountered in this attire one day by an individual who did not know or recognize that Marchese was a priest. Marchese was in the company of a male hairdresser whom he identified as his “companion.” According to officials in the Diocese of Albany, Marchese left Albany in January 1984 and some time later left the priesthood. His last known whereabouts were somewhere in Florida.

Fathers Kenneth Martin and Paul Lapierre were both ordained for the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall by Bishop Brodeur, the former in 1959, the latter in 1958. They both left the diocese in the early 70’s while Bishop Proulx was in charge. Father Lapierre is a brother of Laurier Lapierre, a self-declared homosexual and former lecturer at London, Ontario’s Christ the King College. Prior to his departure from Cornwall, Father Lapierre served as a member of the Diocesan Liturgy Commission, was responsible for the diocese’s marriage prep. programme, and conducted retreats at Villa Fatima in Alexandria. Father Martin, meanwhile, was in charge of diocesan catechetics and served as director of la Sainte-Enfance. The 1973 directory of priests shows both priests residing in Montreal at a common address. At that time, Martin was functioning as a student (he later assumed pastoral responsibilities in the Montreal diocese), and Lapierre was active at St. Jacques Church on St. Catherine Street. Both have retained their incardination in the Diocese of Alexandria-Cornwall while carrying out priestly duties in the Montreal Archdiocese, each eventually assuming pastoral responsibilities in the wealthy English-speaking sectors of the Montreal Archdiocese. Although absent from the Alexandria-Cornwall, it is known that at least Father Lapierre occasionally returned to minister to the flock, witness the following quote from Faith regarding parish missions at St. Columban’s:

Forty hours devotions took place annually with special guest homilists such as Corbin Eddy, a Sulpician priest who was present for the devotions in November 1982 [Father Eddy is now a priest and liturgist in the Archdiocese of Ottawa]. A year earlier, Father Paul Lapierre conducted a successful week-long mission which included homilies each evening from Sunday to Thursday.

In the late 1980s, a spate of sexual abuse charges was levelled against a number of Newfoundland’s diocesan clergy; these were accompanied by revelations of the years of sexual molestation endured by boys at St. John’s Mount Cashel orphanage. To quell demands for action after years of cover-up, Archbishop Penney of St. John’s, Newfoundland commissioned an Enquiry headed by an Anglican, the Honourable Gordon A. Winter, the former Lieutenant Governor of Newfoundland. The four other members of the Commission were Sister Nuala P. Kenny, Father Everett MacNeil, Francis G. O’Flaherty, and John A. Scott PhD. The results of the Commission’s efforts were released in 1990 in the three-volume Winter Commission Report.

The Report is a disturbing read in that it quickly becomes apparent that the Commission went to great lengths to shift its focus from the obvious homosexual dimension of the problem at hand. It did acknowledge that its focus on sexual abuse was “the involvement of male children in any form of sexual activity with members of the Roman Catholic clergy.” It also acknowledged that: the cases before it were homosexual in nature; the clerical predators of Newfoundland “engaged in homosexual behaviour by preference”; the boys involved were at least 12 years old when the sexual abuse started and there was therefore “no compelling evidence of classical pedophilia,”; some of the “perpetrators were sexually active with a number of adolescent male partners at any given time” and “also appear to be homosexual,”and; approximately 30% of the diocesan clergy were “homosexual in orientation.” However, despite these stated observations which were categorized as “a statistical anomaly” the Commission refrained from delving into the sphere of homosexuality and completely avoided Church teaching on the subject. Instead, rather than focus on the startling fact that 30% of the clergy had an orientation which is in itself “objectively disordered,” and that a number of Roman Catholic clergy with an “objectively disordered” sexual orientation were actively practising homosexuals, and that a number of the latter were preying on and sexually molesting adolescent males, the Commission chose to take the politically-correct route. So, among other things, the politically-correct Commission indicated that it was disturbed by the “climate of homophobia” in the Archdiocese of St. John’s, advised that this needs to be addressed “if society is to avoid the unnecessary stigmatization of a significant portion of humankind,” and recommended that “Education programmes should direct public attitudes towards a healthy understanding of sexuality with concomitant goals of discouraging sexual stereotyping and homophobia.” In short, the Commission sidestepped the real issue, that of predatory clerical homosexuals. Instead, it took the opportunity to rely on “feminist experience,” bash the patriarchal structure of the Church, and broaden its study to the “larger social issue of child sexual abuse.”

The final Report evoked accolades from Canadian bishops and became akin to their bible on sexual abuse.

The CCCB Steps in

The same year the Report was released yet another clerical sexual scandal of monumental proportions was erupting in Ontario. A number of priests and Brothers were charged when former residents of reform schools run by the Christian Brothers in Alfred and Uxbridge alleged they had been sexually molested while at the schools. This time the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) stepped in to do damage control. An Ad Hoc committee comprising Andr‚ Boyer (Chief of Social Services for Laval, Quebec School Boards), Rita Cadieux (former Deputy-Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission who was actively involved with the UN Commission on the Status of Women and the UN Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities), Father Gerald Copeman (priest from Diocese of Sault Ste. Marie, active with Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace, diocesan director of Cursillo, President of the National Federation of Councils of Priests), Sr. Nuala Patricia Kenny (pediatrician, Professor at Dalhousie University, Halifax and Chief of Pediatrics at the Isaac Walton Killam Hospital for Children in Halifax), Archbishops Roger bacher (Gatineau-Hull, Quebec), Adam Exner OMI (Vancouver, British Columbia) and James MacDonald csc (St. John’s, Newfoundland) was established to address the situation. The committee was chaired by Archbishop bacher who described sexual molestation as “a form of misconduct.”

The Ad Hoc Committee relied on Father Frank Morrissey OMI and Mr.Paul McAuliffe to chair two of its four work groups. Father Morrisey, who enjoys worldwide repute in the field of Canon Law and has been known to offer canonical assistance to dioceses rocked by scandal, believes and lectures that child molesters are not “moral degenerates,” that child molestation is akin to alcoholism which was once viewed as sinful and is now understood to be a disease, that sexual molestation isn’t grounds to defrock a priest, and that it is not “responsible stewardship” to throw away the $250,000 investment that goes into cost of ordaining a Catholic priest. Paul McAuliffe, a worker with the Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Toronto, was actually invited onto the Committee after making known his modernist criticisms of the patriarchal structures of the Church and his equally modernist opinion that it is the Church’s misuse of power which “seems” to support child abuse. He was also a known member of the homosexual-friendly Coalition of Concerned Canadian Catholics.

McAuliffe and Father Morrissey, with their two confreres Dr. Jeannine Guindon (professional psychotherapist) and Father Jacques Gagn‚ OMI (former rector at Ottawa’s University of St. Paul Seminary), hammered out guidelines with the able assistance of yet another team of “collaborators.” 1 Included were three interesting personages: Father John Loftus SJ, director of Southdown Centre, a facility which treats clergy and religious with problems of sexuality and/or addiction (Southdown is known to be homosexual-friendly); David McCann, the controversial victim from the Alfred scandal who helped the AIDS Committee of Toronto with its fundraising; and, Father Peter O’Hanley, a priest charged and found guilty of sexual molestation.

The Ad Hoc Committee studied, lauded and was influenced by the Winter Commission Report. In June of 1992 its report, From Pain to Hope, was published by the CCCB. The Report included recommendations that legal fees incurred by priests charged with sexual molestation be picked up by the diocese (read: your contributions) and proposed ways to reintegrate convicted clerical molesters into parishes.

Breach of Trust: Breach of Faith, a compilation of “educational materials” for the general public divided into five study sessions, was published simultaneously. Here we really see what the Ad Hoc Committee is all about. The five study sessions were designed “as a tool for raising awareness and promoting education on all aspects of child sexual abuse.” These consciousness-raising materials quote extensively from the Winter Commission Report, resort to New Age imagery, breathing, visualization and role-playing techniques, suggest that the definition of family “must take into account single parents, common-law relationships and other emerging styles of family life,” promote the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and advance the feminist philosophy that the sexual abuse of children “is perpetuated by ignoring the prevalence of patriarchy in our society.” Like the Winter Commission Report, the Ad Hoc Committee completely avoids Church teaching on homosexuality and takes great pains to ensure that homosexuality retains the acceptable moral and legal status it has acquired in the secular world.

Nowhere in any of these reports and guidelines does one find commonsense guidelines which would guarantee a reduction in the cases of sexual assault by predatory clergy and help to restore faith in the Church, i.e.: compel seminaries to screen-out males with a “homosexual” “sexual orientation”; ensure that any seminarian known to engage in homosexual activity with adults, adolescents or boys is thrown out of the seminary and those engaging in illegal activities are reported to the authorities; defrock all priests who are known homosexuals, and; defrock priests who have been charged and convicted of sexual molestation. Only when such guidelines emerge from the mouths of our tongue-tied bishops will Catholics believe their bishops will purge sexual predators from the ranks of the clergy and bank ‘zero tolerance’ for clerical sexual perversion in all its abhorrent and immoral manifestations. Then, and only then, will Canadian Catholics believe that our bishops truly want to eradicate sexual perversion from the Church, protect children, and restore the sacred dignity of the priesthood.

Footnote

Stephen Amesse (then a Senate Research Assistant, ordained to the priesthood at St. Patrick’s Basilica, Ottawa, April 1999 at age 41),

Jeffrey King (then an Ottawa lawyer and staunch supporter of the Liberal Party of Canada, recently ordained to the priesthood at Ottawa’s St. Patrick’s Basilica at age 58),

Dr. Jocelyn Aubut (psychiatrist),

Charlene Belleau (sexual abuse research coordinator for the Cariboo Tribal Council in British Columbia),

Father L Pigeon OMI (retired professor with the Faculty of Education at University of Ottawa),

Father Terrence Prendergast SJ (then professor at Regis College in Toronto’s St. Michael’s University, now Bishop of Halifax),

Msgr. Jean-Marc Robillard (director of formation for future priests with the Diocese of St. Hyacinthe, Quebec),

Dr. Gilles Schrer (psychiatrist at the Institut Pinel de Montreal).

Leneen Forde Interview 4 Corners.
Interview with Leneen Forde

This is an edited transcript of an interview conducted by Four Corners reporter Quentin McDermott with Leneen Forde, the Griffith University Chancellor and Head of the 1997 Forde Inquiry which examined whether there had been any abuse, mistreatment or neglect of children in more than 150 institutions throughout Queensland from 1911 until the present day.

The following is an edited interview transcript. Due to the possibility of mis-hearing, the ABC cannot vouch for

Leneen, why were children put into institutional care in the first place?

Usually they were put into care because they’d lost a parent; of the 300 people that came forward to the enquiry, nearly everyone still had one parent alive, but they couldn’t afford to keep them themselves – there was no child support in those days, or else perhaps they were mentally ill and unable to care for their children so they came under the care of the state. Some of them were put into corrective institutions because they might’ve been a little bit wild in their youth; some of the girls particularly were running away from abusive situations in their own home and really shouldn’t have been in – locked up for it, but they were sort of blamed as being uncontrollable.

Despite the fact that they were put into care, it was still the case wasn’t it, that sometimes parents had to actually pay for the upkeep?

Yes, I think everybody was charged a fee and we heard of one case where a sole father got so far into debt he owed 50 or 80 pounds to the government for the care of his children and he just ran away and they never saw him again.

Leneen, how traumatic was it for children to go to court and then be sent to one of these homes and maybe not have a very good welcome when they got there?

Well some of them would never recover from the traumatic experience I’m sure. I did see a 7 year old in court one time, so it did happen that very young people came before the courts.

Was it simply accepted in those days that that’s what happened to children?

I don’t think people knew that they were going to court. I think they just thought it was another place, you know – out of sight, out of mind – and a lot of good people would go by these places and never realise what was going on inside.

Now you heard from a wide range of witnesses, and were you shocked by what you discovered in this enquiry?

I certainly was. I knew that there was a problem, because I’d read about problems in other places in other countries and when I took it on, I knew there were going to be some sad stories, but they were really harrowing tales – some of them, and terrible abuse for some children, and, and very hard for them to tell their story – very distressing for them, for the staff listening to them day after day. We had court reporters who would record everything, and they were only lasting two days at a time. They go to court and listen to a murder trial for 2, 3, 4 weeks or longer – but they say it’s just one story that they’re listening to. Here, they were hearing four terrible tales a day and finding it very hard to cope with.

In very general terms, how good or bad were the Salvation Army homes?

They were as bad as some of the other places that we’ve heard about, yes. It was a very strict regime and children need nurturing and caring people.

Did the boys and girls in Salvation Army homes receive any kind of real care and affection?

Not from the stories that we heard, but we didn’t hear from everybody that went through those homes. There were some practices that just seemed very hard to understand, for instance the girls going into Kalimna were put into solitary right away on arrival – it was like an induction process and that’s a kind of drastic way to introduce somebody into a new regime.

Was solitary confinement properly regulated and approved by the authorities?

Not that I know of, but it happened and we heard about it time and again…

Now, not only were the girls at Kalimna put into solitary confinement as an induction, but we’ve heard from one former girl who says she was put into solitary confinement for something like 5 ½ months. Now, is there any way at all that kind of confinement – that kind of imprisoning of a child can be justified?

I don’t think so. I’ve never been in solitary confinement so I can’t say how awful it is, but it certainly seems very hard on a young person that has no idea how long they’re going to be kept there. Sometimes they didn’t know why they were there.

Well it’s not far off torture really, is it?

That’s right. And young children really in institutions – it’s just not a good thing for them. It’s so much better if they can be cared for another way and I think even today with children of the refugees who are confined – who’s really watching out for them? Who’s looking after them?

At Kalimna, one of the things the girls had to do was work in a very hot, steamy laundry with hot irons, and some of them complained about being injured in the process. What was your impression of that laundry and why did they have to work there?

Just seemed to be the thing they were doing in those days. It wasn’t the only place that had a laundry – they had a laundry at Holy Cross Convent.

So was it essentially cheap labour?

Couldn’t be much cheaper than free. It certainly was cheap labour – they didn’t get paid anything.

Just to move onto the other homes where we’ve interviewed people. Riverview was a farm as I understand it. Did the boys at Riverview work on the farm as a form of cheap labour, or was it a proper kind of training environment for them?

Well I guess it was cheap labor, but people at that time probably thought they were teaching them something that would be useful to them later on in life – manual labour was good to keep children out of trouble – that sort of thing. But it was a very dilapidated place and there were a lot of complaints about it but still ran for quite a few years.

One witness we’ve interviewed from Riverwood talked about a stock whip being used to beat the children with.

We heard stories like that – not just from there, but we certainly did hear stories of very brutal physical abuse as well as sexual abuse in some cases, but it’s hard to imagine. Think back to the 50’s and 60’s and you know people maybe got the cuts at school or the strap for something, but people weren’t horse whipped. Certainly that was not acceptable at any time, to horse whip a child for goodness sakes, no… I just know that from witnesses we heard all kinds of harrowing stories that you found hard to believe when it was just one story, but when you heard the same story from one person after another, you had to give credence to it.

How bad was the sexual abuse at these homes?

Any sexual abuse of a child has to be pretty horrific, and it didn’t happen all the time, but in the different institutions they would get one perpetrator, or some volunteers would come in to help and they were inclined to be paedophiles and certainly the children were very badly affected. We were told by psychologists that advised us that a child in a normal home who’s sexually abused and has a loving relationship in the home will never forget what happened to them. They’ll grow up just the same as everybody else and live with it and it’s just a memory. But children in homes that were sexually abused had no-one to complain to – no-one to love them, no-one to say It’ll be all right, dear and it won’t happen again, because it would happen again. Some of those people who came forward were favourites of certain abusers and the terrible stories we heard were very hard – not only to listen to but hard for the people to come forward and tell their stories. It affects them all their lives. We had one man come to us who couldn’t go to a doctor cause he couldn’t take his clothes off – can you imagine?

Leneen, just on the sexual abuse – we’ve certainly heard from witnesses who talk about sexual abuse by older boys on younger boys by actual officers and volunteers – even by people coming in occasionally off the street. Did you hear that kind of evidence?

Certainly. Every one of those scenarios we heard about. I don’t know that there was any screening of people coming to take children out for a weekend – you just put your hand up and said I’ll have a little boy or I’ll have 2 or 3, and the authorities seemed quite willing to let the children go. It was a different era of course where people weren’t as aware of the dangers to children. Certainly I feel after we conducted the enquiry that it seemed to bring a lot of that sort of behaviour to notice of people, so that just about every other day now you read in the paper somebody’s been taken to court for being a paedophile. But in the 50’s and 60’s you didn’t hear about it as much, I don’t think, and so perhaps good people that were running some of these organisations had no idea of what was happening to the children as they were being taken out. But, in many cases there were abusers working in the institutions too – it was a great place for a paedophile to, to work. A lot of institutions would be OK most of the time and then one of these people would come and work there, so that we’d hear about a certain period of time for an institution where there was a problem. I should say there were some places better run than others but sometimes you’d get really an evil person that was in charge, and then the abuse would run right through the whole organisation, and even if there was a good and caring worker there, a whistle-blower say, they’d usually get sacked.

Did you hear evidence of actual paedophile rings?

We had some evidence, but not enough to really follow it right through.

According to your report, the superintendent of a Salvation Army home in the 1970’s claimed that liberal use of corporal punishment was being carried out with tacit approval of the department. Is that true, do you think?

It could be, so I wouldn’t disagree with that, but I don’t know for sure.

What were the key recommendations of your enquiry and have they been followed through?

Here in Queensland, most of the recommendations have been followed through. The key ones were more money should be put into the department that was caring for children and that has happened, but certainly not enough. The department’s still understaffed. Society has to value its children more – certainly as much as football stadiums anyhow, and the department has put some money into a fund to try to better the lives of people that went through those institutions. Again, they could do more. The main thing was that it should never happen again and that there should be safeguards – people should be checking on children – make sure that they’re all right when they’re taken into care of the state. We certainly would never recommend institutional care again – they’re better off with foster parents, but the foster parents have to be well screened and children have to be interviewed separately – away from the person that’s looking after them. You know people used to send inspectors out to these institutions, but I don’t know that they ever talked to the children. I think they went and had dinner with the head and the institution would know that they were coming next Wednesday so the place was all cleaned up before they came – that sort of thing.

I believe one of the results of your enquiry was that there was a police taskforce set up, Argos, which looked into some of the potential criminal charges… Has anyone actually been charged and convicted as a result of your enquiries?

There have been convictions that followed the enquiry – we certainly sent a lot of names through to the police. The trouble is that the people who were abused have a hard time in court. They’re not really first class witnesses in most cases and juries have doubts as to whether they should really convict the person. That’s very unfortunate because certainly I know of one person who was taken to trial a couple of times who’s since died but we heard many stories about that person and they never got a conviction, because the witnesses couldn’t remember the time or the date or technical things that lawyers expect people to be able to prove a case. They’re unable to do it.

Hardly surprising when you’re talking about events which occurred 40 years ago.

That’s right, and no way for them to judge time either. A lot of them didn’t know how old they were, they didn’t celebrate birthdays in there, so there was nothing to judge those events against other things that were happening to them, because every day was the same. Whereas in my childhood I can remember something related to Christmas, or a happy event that dates things.

And then a further bar to prosecutions of course, is the statute of limitations.

Statute of limitations definitely is a bar and I feel that there should be some sort of compensation for those people. I think that the government should waive the statute of limitations or redress the problem. It’s not just a legal problem, it’s a moral problem of what society owes those people because they were harmed in that way.

We’ve heard in some cases the Salvation Army has made ex gratia payments to some of the women at Kalimna – $10,000 each. Is that a sufficient compensation for what occurred in that home?

I don’t think so. I don’t think $10,000 would go anywhere towards helping them to rebuild their lives, and if they do need help those people, because some of them need the psychological assistance, some of them are trying to get their lives together and need help. We’ve been helping through the Forde Foundation giving people fees to go on with their schooling. A lot of them were illiterate and their education was very sadly lacking from those days, so there’s lots of things that you can do to compensate people and ten thousand dollars doesn’t go very far, does it – especially if you’re scarred for life with whatever happened to you in an institution. I don’t know about those Salvation Army payments but certainly other governments have made big changes. In Ireland they’ve paid hundreds of $millions to try and redress the wrongs that were done to people in the past.

Should Australia adopt a different system for compensating these victims?

I think so. I think people should be compensated because what happened to them was the fault of the state, the fault of the churches that didn’t care for them properly and, and money isn’t everything I know, but it certainly helps makes people’s lives better, doesn’t it?

The system which I believe the Canadians and maybe the Irish have adopted is one where they don’t demand a burden of proof, which would be demanded in a criminal case.

The burden of proof is too high for these people to be able to prove their cases as well as the statute of limitations being a bar, because if they haven’t complained within 3 years of their turning 18, well they’re out of luck and the people we saw were 50 and 60 year olds, and they weren’t the only ones damaged because they have trouble often with their own family relationships because they weren’t brought up in a caring family. They have a hard time knowing how to be a good parent so often their children have difficulties too. And because the parents weren’t well educated, they’re good workers and good, caring people but they usually work at manual labour and it doesn’t pay very well. A lot of them have really shunned society and live in lonely, isolated places. Some are very clever people – incredibly clever people. Through the Forde Foundation we make small grants to people and a number of people have wanted computers.

And of course there’ve been suicides.

There have been suicides. There were suicides before the report and after. People who came to see us have suicided since, and we found that very hard to take. The people that came to us were very brave as they had no guarantee they’d be believed. It took a lot of courage to come forward and tell their story, and because they did it’s opened like a can of worms for the whole country. It wasn’t just a Queensland problem. It’s an Australian problem and every other state can find the very same stories, I’m sure.

Well what should happen nation-wide? We’ve had your enquiry here in Queensland – what should happen nationally?

It would be good if this enquiry that’s being held could recommend some form of redress be made for all these people using a different method, so that they didn’t have to go and tell their torturous stories over again.

Should there be a royal commission?

Probably doesn’t need a royal commission.

There is a real injustice, isn’t there – a real gap between the kinds of compensation payments which some of these old boys and girls have received, and the kind of compensation which they would’ve received if, for example, they’d been abused at a private school?

Well I don’t understand how that’s happening. I’ve heard that a private school here has paid out compensation. It’s a secret payment apparently, but word has it that a number of boys at a very good school here in town have been given upwards of four hundred thousand dollars each. Now these are people that come from good homes and maybe can afford better lawyers and could certainly give better evidence of their situation then the people I’m talking about. The people who came forward to the enquiry had incredible stories. There were really just awful to listen to but we believed them, but you know a good barrister in court would turn them upside down and mix them up and, and could pass doubt on the individual’s story. But when you hear the same thing from dozens of people that were in the same institution, you know that the food wasn’t adequate, there weren’t enough blankets on the bed, they were regularly beaten, the horse whip came out, or that so-and-so that worked in that department was a paedophile that used to abuse them.

There’s a whole secret history here, isn’t there? Rather in the same way as with the stolen generations or the child migrants – don’t you think there’s a whole generation here of children who were put into these institutional homes and whose stories are only just now beginning to come out?

Yes, they certainly are… we asked everybody that came to the enquiry what they’d like to see as a result of the enquiry and nearly every one of them said they didn’t want to see another child abused. They just wanted it to never happen again, and for people to record that history and make sure that it didn’t – that was very, very strong answer from nearly everyone. Nobody asked for money. They wanted an apology, they wanted to be recognised as somebody who was truthful and that something horrible had happened to. So we do owe them a lot and telling them we’re sorry it happened. I’m sorry it happened. I used to go and take three or four children away from an orphanage at holiday time, and I had no idea what was really happening in there. I can remember one nun though, by herself had 32 babies under two years of age that she was looking after – day and night, seven days a week. She was a good person, but you know you – nobody can do a job like that adequately, and, and I remember thinking at the time – those poor children, you know – but what could I do? I came home to my family.

Have organisations like the Salvation Army realised the enormity of the damage caused to this generation?

I don’t know that they have. No – not just the Salvation Army – other church groups too. They have to realise that it’s a moral issue for them. I mean what would Christ have done? He’d have put out a helping hand and an apology, a shoulder to cry on – I’m sorry this happened, we were at fault, but they don’t get that because I suspect people are more worried about saving their good name, their property and their assets.https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heiner-Affair-Australias-Shredgate/780943801979360?ref=hl

• Canadian common law courts convene under the authority of a new Republic

• Child rape not a crime in Catholicism: Archbishop’s admission to American court is a wake up call to why it all must end

Tuam, Ireland and Brussels:

The remains of nearly 800 babies found in a cistern at the Catholic St. Mary’s Mothers and Babies Home near Tuam “bear marks of ritual killing” according to a source within the Garda, Ireland’s police force.

“The forensic people have told us that the configuration of the remains and evidence of continual decapitation and dismemberment resemble the usual signs of ritualistic murder … These children weren’t just cut up, they were massacred.”

The Irish government and Roman Catholic church have announced their own in-house “investigation” of the mass grave, and have closed off the site without declaring it to be a crime scene: the standard procedure in any institutional cover-up. Hundreds of protestors marched in Dublin today to the Irish Dail, or Parliament, demanding a full inquiry with the power to prosecute.

Meanwhile, as the Common Law trial of Pope Francis and others for child trafficking and murder proceeds in Brussels, a new Dutch witness has shed more light on the Ninth Circle Satanic network and its links to child killings in England, Belgium and Ireland.

The witness, a retired public official, has named nine top judges, politicians, Bilderberger member George Soros and Prince Friso, the brother of the present King of Holland, as participants in killings of children she observed in Oudergem, Belgium and Zwolle, Holland during 1996 and 2000. The witness gave her videotaped testimony last Monday to Court investigators.

“In some woods near Oudergem, they hunted those naked children through the forest and shot them down … then they cut off the penises of the dead boys and held them up as trophies. I saw Belgian soldiers patrolling the woods and protecting the men who did the hunting, men like Prince Friso, King Albert of Belgium and Mark Rutte, the Prime Minister. I recognized George Soros in the hunting party too, you know, the billionaire. He is good friends with Friso’s wife, Mabel Wisse Smit.”

Friso, younger brother to Dutch King Willelm, died suddenly in a hospital last year while recovering from a “skiing accident”. His death came just before the public exposure of high level child murder by former Belgian Member of Parliament Laurent Louis.

The witness also described the presence of “a Catholic prelate” at a separate murder of three teenage juvenile offenders near Zwolle, Holland in 2004.

“A criminal syndicate called ‘The Octopus’ provides the children by taking them from juvenile detention centers. There were three of them that day, two boys and a girl. All of them were raped and tortured to death at a house near Zwolle owned by the gangsters. Friso was there, and some Catholic prelate I didn’t recognize because he spoke English. But I remember Friso calling him ‘The Irishman’ and he also referred to the Nine or the Group of Nine or something.”

The witness was present at the killings and is a former member of the alleged “Octopus” crime syndicate that controls the drug trade in Holland and Belgium. She is the fourth insider to come forward to describe ritual killings by top officials in the Netherlands and Belgium.

Ninth Circle Rituals targeted for shut down

Montreal and Dublin:

Professionally trained sheriffs are preparing to shut down planned Ninth Circle sacrificial rituals at Catholic churches in Montreal, Canada and Dublin, Ireland this summer and autumn, and arrest and charge the participants with murder.

The sheriffs are presently undergoing training within Direct Action Units established by the Common Law Court of Justice in Brussels, and its dozens of local affiliates.

A statement from the Court’s Sheriff’s Office reads,

“We are targeting two cathedrals where the Ninth Circle ritual killing of babies are scheduled to take place on August 15 and at the new moon in September, those being Pro Cathedral in Dublin and Marie Reine du Monde Cathedral in Montreal. Everyone present will be arrested and arraigned before the Court for suspected child murder. We will use every force that’s necessary to save the lives of those children.”

The Sheriff’s Office will be notifying the Garda police in Dublin of their intentions and calling upon their assistance. In Montreal, the regular police, as agents of the criminally convicted “crown of england”, will be ordered to stand down and not interfere with the Sheriffs’ actions, and will be charged with criminal collusion and obstructing justice if they do interfere.

A New Republic in Canada: Common Law Courts to receive Constitutional Legitimacy

Winnipeg:

In the wake of last year’s criminal conviction and lawful annulment of Canada’s head of state, Elizabeth Windsor, for Crimes against Humanity, patriots across Canada are gathering in Winnipeg this October at a Constitutional Convention to establish a sovereign Republic in Canada to replace so-called “Crown” authority.

The Convention will issue a Proclamation of Independence and a Constitution to be ratified by the people of Canada. It will also provide a legitimate basis for the establishment of de jure common law courts of record across Canada.

Kevin Annett, an adviser to the Winnipeg-based Provisional Council for the Republic, said today in a joint statement with Council Chairman Cameron Shields,

“One woman in London, Elizabeth Windsor, owns all of the lands and minerals of our country and has murdered and can murder children at her pleasure. She also calls herself the head of state of Canada. We will not live under such tyranny any longer, nor allow our children to. Under the law, there is no lawful authority in Canada any longer. We must create that authority and come under the rule of common law, and a true Republic. We ask every Canadian to join us.”

The Convention will take place between October 27-31, 2014. It will establish the constitutional basis for common law courts in Canada and for the legal disestablishment of the Crown of England and its sponsor, the Church of Rome.

The Council has issued a draft Proclamation and Constitution to Convention delegates. To receive a copy and attend the Convention, contact the Council at republicofkanata@gmail.com .

A Final Comment: Child rape not a crime in Catholicism – Archbishop’s admission is a wake up call

Catholic Archbishop Robert Carlson stated this week to American lawyers that he was “not aware that child rape is a crime”. Carlson is responsible for the concealment of priestly child trafficking in his Minneapolis diocese as far back as 1980. (NBC News, June 10, 2014)

Carlson’s outrageous remarks are not an aberration or a cause to simply be outraged: they are in fact an honest description of official Catholic policy and attitude. The rape of children is not a crime under catholic “canon law” (see Crimen Sollicitationas, http://www.hiddennolonger.com , appendix 9), nor according to the depraved values of catholic clergy and officials.

When Carlson expresses doubt over whether it’s wrong to rape a child, we should hardly be surprised. He has been raised in a religious culture that condones and belittles the crime because it profits massively from it to the tune of a multi-billion dollar a year in house child trafficking industry.

How long would any politician last if he made Carlson’s remark? The Church of Rome, of course, can get away with murder and this kind of obscenity, and does, all the time.

So why is the world tolerating the continued existence of this church: the worst child killing institution in human history?

Give your answer in the streets, not simply in your re-awakened outrage.

……………..

To contact the Court or its local affiliates to volunteer for any aspect of its work, contact itccscentral@gmail.com or hiddenfromhistory1@gmail.com . Messages can be left at 386-323-5774 (USA) or 250-591-4573 (Canada).

Stand by for further Court Bulletins.

Issued by the Citizen Prosecutor’s Office, Public Information Agency, Brussels

Kevin Annett is a Nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize (2013). Messages for him can be left at 250-591-4573 (Canada) or 386-323-5774 (USA). His personal website is http://www.KevinAnnett.com .

“I gave Kevin Annett his Indian name, Eagle Strong Voice, in 2004 when I adopted him into our Anishinabe Nation. He carries that name proudly because he is doing the job he was sent to do, to tell his people of their wrongs. He speaks strongly and with truth. He speaks for our stolen and murdered children. I ask everyone to listen to him and welcome him.”
Chief Louis Daniels – Whispers Wind
Elder, Crane Clan, Anishinabe Nation, Winnipeg, Manitoba

Kevin Annett is a Nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize (2013). Messages for him can be left at 250-591-4573 (Canada) or 386-323-5774 (USA). His personal website is http://www.KevinAnnett.com .

“I gave Kevin Annett his Indian name, Eagle Strong Voice, in 2004 when I adopted him into our Anishinabe Nation. He carries that name proudly because he is doing the job he was sent to do, to tell his people of their wrongs. He speaks strongly and with truth. He speaks for our stolen and murdered children. I ask everyone to listen to him and welcome him.”
Chief Louis Daniels – Whispers Wind
Elder, Crane Clan, Anishinabe Nation, Winnipeg, Manitoba

Attachments area

Preview YouTube video The International Common Law Court: Genocide in Canada

The International Common Law Court: Genocide in Canada

Preview YouTube video Second Session of The International Common Law Court of Justice

Whilst this interview took place on the 4th august,2012, listening to it now bring’s a shiver up my spine!Canadian IT company’s effort’s to hack into our email accounts, Mass grave’s across the Commonwealth in what i describe as “A wasteland of Deprivation!,Divide and Conquer effort’s by Government funded Organisation’s who see there $100’000 plus income’s more important than addressing the Attrocities that have occured,Medical Experiment’s for vaccine’s such as “Herpes”,the list of attrocities just go on and on.When will the “Victim’s” recieve Justice? How can the Government, in good concience,suppress the list of name’s concerning children used as guinea pig’s, a fact they’ve never denied and also a National Apology was offered,via the Age Newspaper,by The Eliza Hall Research lab and the CSIRO stating that whilst they admit the experiment’s took place they have no intention of releasing the names of those children who were so despicably used, and worse still, those who died as a result of these experiments were simply and heartlessly buried in limestone, unmarked grave’s, some three and four to a grave!Yes a Wasteland of Deprivation who’s facade is that of weed’s,reed’s and judicial seed’s! http://www.blogtalkradio.com/wethejury/2012/08/04/guest-with-kevin-annett
Kevin will begin the show with some updates after which our two Australian guests will be discussing various happenings with each of their groups.

Kathy Devine was a general nurse who also worked in two remote locations as well. She herself was a victim of child sexual assault – the offenders including a parish priest and a catholic school teacher as a child.
Kathy will be talking about a letter she wrote to the Prime Minister in 1999 that may have played a part in a formal apology by the Government of Australia to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people of Australia. She also is working with GCAC members seeking a Royal Commission to address the Criminal Abuse of children by Religious and other Entities and is also a member of and coordinator of Survivors of Clergy Abuse Australia.

Wayne Simmonds is one of the founders of Forgotten Australians Justice Committee and a former inmate of one of Australia’s Orphanages. He will be updating us on the progress of their mission at Neerkol Orphanage as well as a recent attempt by hackers to get access to their group account by a company called Internap IT Solutions.

) Adrian Fulford (now Lord Justice Fulford), who was named last week in the Mail on Sunday as a key organiser of the so-called Conspiracy Against Public Morals to support key PIE figures, and wrote an article defending PIE (Martin Beckford, ‘High Court judge and the child sex ring: Adviser to Queen was founder of paedophile support group to keep offenders out of jail’, Mail on Sunday, March 9th, 2014), also acted as Smith’s defence barrister in a court case concerning publishing obscene material featuring children in 1991. Smith had previously fled to the Netherlands to avoid trial, and was tried after being deported by Dutch authorities (Sue Clough, ‘Paedophile jailed over child porn material’, Press Association, December 16th, 1991).

The Prime Minister or at least the Home Secretary need to make a statement about this level of PIE infiltration (involving three, possibly four individuals directly linked to the organisation) into the very government department responsible for law and order. Also, to answer the following questions:

(i) who was responsible for their employment (and dismissal or delay thereof) these individuals?
(ii) which ministers (Labour and/or Conservative) would have been aware of these individuals’s presence in the department?
(iii) which would have authorised the payments to PIE?

We also know that senior diplomat and MI6 officer Peter Hayman was an active member of PIE, and that members of PIE (including Smith – see above) received active political and legal support from a current High Court Judge (see Beckford, ‘High Court judge’, above); a further judge, now Chief Coroner, Peter Thornton, was also involved with the provision such support (Martin Beckford, ‘Now Chief Coroner is exposed as paedophile apologist who wanted age of consent to be 14′, Daily Mail, March 16th, 2014). Leading PIE member Peter Righton managed to wean his way into the whole social work and child protection world, occupying senior and influential positions (see a whole range of articles here), and his name has been linked to networks operating in public schools (see Eileen Fairweather, ‘Paedophile ring alleged at top public schools’, Standard, September 19th, 1996) and children’s homes. Not to mention PIE being affiliated to NCCL, who would take out adverts in two different PIE publications, Understanding Paedophilia and Magpie; current senior Labour politicians, including Deputy Leader Harriet Harman and Shadow Minister for Policing Jack Dromey were involved at the heart of NCCL at this time. The names of other senior politicians, including late MPs Peter Morrison (Conservative) and Cyril Smith (Liberal Democrat) have also been publicly linked to organised abuse involving young children in homes.

This is an extremely serious situation which demonstrates that the PIE network was able to infiltrate some of the upper echelons of British government and society in the 1970s and 1980s, This needs to be thoroughly investigated with proper resources and funding.

I also have clear information on the extent to which PIE members or sympathisers were very influential in different branches of academia – sociology, social work, child protection and the study of child abuse, criminology, music and the arts, and gender and sexuality studies. Some of their work was published by reputable scholarly journals (as I have detailed in the case of Hindley), and many obtained senior positions in leading universities. Various of their students continued to develop their ideas. To this day, some of their publications are still cited or otherwise used as if they were reliable and trustworthy, to such an extent that I believe elements of these professions have been corrupted.

Clear documentary evidence points to a highly-organised network with PIE at its centre; a network responsible not simply for the advocacy of paedophilia, but the organisation international rings of abusers and for the trafficking in child pornography. The seriousness of this cannot be underestimated. All politicians should be supporting the work of Tom Watson MP in trying to bring to light this awful network (which cannot be assumed to be merely ‘historic’), and address honestly the ways in which its activities and ideologies may have infiltrated their own parties.
ELM GUEST HOUSE (pedophile list)

There is a foul, putrid stench of CSA permeating the House of Common’s and Buckingham Palace and U.K CSA survivor’s are demanding the Queen sanction a “Transparent” Royal Commission into CSA.This author certainly wont be holding his breath in anticipation and i cite Australia’s “Heiner Affair”,FordeInquiry,QCPCI,Canada’s “Cornwall Inquiry”,Ireland’s Royal Commission Into CSA and the current Royal Commission in Australia for that assertion!The common denominator with all these Inquiries is clearly the English Monarchy, secondly,the appointment of Commissioners to chair these Inquiries are tainted with corruption and whose appointment is based on a “Damage Control” mantra! Victim’s of CSA throughout the commonwealth, see through the facade and the Establishment know it.https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzEep4M8b2sJRkRjY09SRnE1NEU/edit?pli=1Ireland’s Justice Murphy speaking at Victoria University about the difficulties of investigating child sex abuse by clergy.A must listen! I confronted Justice Murphy via question time about the placement of corrupt figures in commission’s of inquiry who simply go into damage control and i cited “The Cornwall Inquiry” and “The Forde Inquiry”as an example of this and i also stated that the epidemic of child sex abuse throughout the commonwealth is covered up and protected by the Monarchy.I was quickly cut short by Chief Justice Frank Vincent who was clearly livid that i had the balls to even ask such a question,shit i thought he was about to have a cardiac!! In the audience was the who’s who of the Judiciary,Supreme Court,County Court and Magistrates court. They say there’s a fine line between bravery and stupidity!! I must say i felt pretty stupid after realising i may very well have put a target on myself!https://www.facebook.com/pages/Heiner-Affair-Australias-Shredgate/780943801979360?ref=hl